Support Board
Support Board
Search Board
Control Panel
View My Posts / Threads
Direct MessagesDate/Time: Sat, 20 Apr 2024 00:50:40 +0000
Post From: Sierra Chart Does Not Recommend CQG (Various Reasons)
| [2022-02-17 02:33:17] |
| |
|
We want to give some other reasons why we do not like CQG. CQG uses what is called Google protocol buffers for the interface, and this clutters the Sierra Chart code base. Google protocol buffers does not clutter the code base. It is the generated code from the protocol buffer definition files from CQG which does. The object code, created from the associated definition files from CQG, constitutes the very largest module within Sierra Chart. This makes no sense at all. Far exceeding, our charting module, which is the largest component in Sierra Chart. Why would we want this within our software. Makes no sense. We have our own order routing and own market data (Teton and Denali). There is no reason to be using CQG unless you want to trade on other exchanges not supported by Teton. Information about the Teton Order Routing Service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing CQG also charges us to use their API. This makes no sense. And then you also pay per trade .10USD per contract. With Teton, you pay nothing. And on top of that you have a superior level of service with Teton. So the choice is clear. Move from CQG to Teton! And there is also a massive difference, in the way that CQG market data is processed, as compared to Sierra Chart data feeds. CQG data is processed on the primary thread of Sierra Chart and the market depth data from CQG is not efficient as compared to the Denali Data Feed due to all the levels being transmitted that the user may not need, and the periodic refreshes. And the market depth data is not acceptable in the way that it is presented and Sierra Chart cannot do proper pulling and stacking calculations. Sierra Chart data feeds like the Denali data feed are processed on a background thread, and there is no decoding of data necessary. The process is much much more efficient. The data already exists in the necessary binary format. Whereas with CQG, this Google protocol buffer function has to be called: ParseFromArray which takes time. And if you are with Ninja trader, or Tradeovate, move your account to a broker that supports Teton. We really do not want you on CQG and we do not want any further questions about connecting to these brokers through CQG. You can find the supported brokers here: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing: Setup Instructions And at some point we would want to remove CQG support altogether within Sierra Chart. We do not know when. But there are various considerations to this. CQG support is likely to be discontinued by Sierra Chart at the end of 2022. There simply is no reason to be using CQG, if you are trading the CME Group markets. You are disadvantaged by using CQG (like not having server-side bracket orders or properly managed OCO orders). We are providing a superior service, and at no additional cost. Whereas CQG is charging for their order routing at .10 per contract per fill. Sierra Chart Support - Engineering Level Your definitive source for support. Other responses are from users. Try to keep your questions brief and to the point. Be aware of support policy: https://www.sierrachart.com/index.php?l=PostingInformation.php#GeneralInformation For the most reliable, advanced, and zero cost futures order routing, *change* to the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2022-03-30 13:52:25
|