Home >> Support Board

Support Board

Date/Time: Sat, 27 Apr 2024 23:53:44 +0000

How to Post a Message for Support

Question: AMP Transaction Fees, TT versus CQG.

View Count: 11647

[2020-01-15 08:10:05] #1 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
When we have recommended using the Sierra Chart Order routing service which utilizes TT (Trading Technologies) trading accounts, it was with our understanding that the transaction fees that an AMP customer pays does not change if they are moving from CQG. And you will actually save if you are moving from Rithmic or CTS. Coming from CQG the commissions would be the same, the exchange fees would be the same, and the per contract fee remains at .10. The only additional cost is the Denali data feed for CME group data at 20 USD per month extra. And as we get more users we will see how we can adjust that cost but Sierra Chart is also providing considerably more data access than CQG for this price. We have heard from some users that there is an additional transaction fee when using TT. That fee is not being billed by TT to AMP because we pay TT for transaction fees. So we want to know if there are any additional transaction fees when using AMP for TT order routing versus CQG. And there is a major advantage to use the Sierra Chart TT order routing versus CQG for CME group markets: -Permanent storage on the server of order fill history to create long-term, complete and accurate and consistently stable trading statistics and profit/loss calculations. -Web-based trading panel which can also be used by a mobile phone (available now). No additional cost and connect as many times as you want to it without having to disconnect Sierra Chart. -Server managed bracket orders for safety and speed. Now if you are trading other markets like EUREX or other exchanges CQG is fine. We are only going to recommend what we think is the best solution for CME/CBOT/NYMEX/COMEX group trading. 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: 2020-01-16 06:11:43

[2020-01-15 09:03:23] #2 [Go To First Post]
binaryduke - Posts: 360
Attached is the fee breakdown from my AMP account that uses TT routing for 2 round trips on CL. You will see a line item for CLEARING TTNET. I have queried this previously with AMP and been advised that this is a separate item to order routing. I have in the past been erroneously charged for TT routing (circa $0.60 per contract) in addition to this clearing line item. Of course, if the CLEARING TTNET line item should not be there it would be good to know so that this can be reclaimed from AMP... Hope this helps.


Screen Shot 2020-01-15 at 08.59.58.png / V - Attached On 2020-01-15 09:02:39 UTC - Size: 22.13 KB - 887 views

[2020-01-15 09:17:48] #3 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
This was not our understanding there would be an additional fee. Why would we be recommending the solution, when there is a $0.50 per side contract fee. It makes no sense. We do not understand the basis of this. And we are not happy about this at all. We are specifically telling users there are no fees from TT to the clearing firm but this makes it look like there is some TT fee. There just is not. Our fee from TT is .05 per contract per side. We then add .05 ourselves. This is all the cost there is. This is what made this an attractive solution. 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: 2020-01-15 09:19:27

[2020-01-15 09:22:22] #4 [Go To First Post]
binaryduke - Posts: 360
Could I ask that you get a clear/definitive statement from AMP about this please and share their explanation? My experience of their help has been mixed - there are some excellent and knowledgable support people there but also some total wastes of space. I'd hope that you have a better and more consistent connection into their commercial team. With that, if there are charges on (our) accounts that should not be there, we'll be able to seek redress in an informed way. Thanks.

[2020-01-15 09:25:33] #5 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
Yes we will discuss this with AMP. We really had no idea until recently about this fee. 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

[2020-01-15 09:30:43] #6 [Go To First Post]
binaryduke - Posts: 360
If this is of any help, attached here is a view of Rithmic charges from AMP (24 micro contract round trips). You will see there is still a line item for clearing that is separate from order routing (RITHMIC TRF), exchange fees, NFA fees and broker commissions.


Screen Shot 2020-01-15 at 09.28.37.png / V - Attached On 2020-01-15 09:30:34 UTC - Size: 21.07 KB - 751 views Attachment Deleted.

[2020-01-15 09:33:19] #7 [Go To First Post]
binaryduke - Posts: 360
To post #5, I suspect that the issue is lack of clarity (not only from AMP - this is common to most brokers) on the breakdown of costs per round trip. Commissions are the headline fees promoted by brokers. Exchange and NFA is the same anywhere. Routing fees relate to the data service provision and has been the point you are making - certainly the SC/TT routing is more attractive than the Rithmic routing fees. The 'new' information comes from 'clearing fees' that seem to vary based upon the routing provider. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2020-01-15 09:43:20

[2020-01-15 09:42:18] #8 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
In regards to post #6, we calculate you traded 46 contracts and at .25 USD per contract billed by Rithmic, the Rithmic transaction fee makes sense. In the case of TT there is no cost to AMP for TT routing. Nothing additional. Certainly they have to pay TT for what is called Map fees. But that is fixed at something like 5000 a month for the CME group. And they have that cost no matter how many users are on TT. This Clearing TT Fee is double Rithmic and then you have the .10 on top of it. This is not making any sense. 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

[2020-01-15 20:38:26] #9 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
Deducing the number of contracts traded from the NFA fee (.02/contract), previously on Rithmic you are paying .31 between commissions and transaction fees, excluding NFA and exchange fees, and now with TT you are paying .75. And that is excluding the .10 we charge you directly. Are the calculations we have correct? The .31 does not seem correct. If .25 goes to Rithmic that means AMP is only getting .06? That does not make sense to us. 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: 2020-01-15 20:39:25

[2020-01-15 20:56:15] #10 [Go To First Post]
nosast - Posts: 290
My statement shows correct fees, at least for trading ES. In the attachement I traded 3 round turns. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2020-01-15 20:56:31


TRD_ 2020-01-15 - 21.53.35.png / V - Attached On 2020-01-15 20:56:08 UTC - Size: 13.03 KB - 665 views

[2020-01-15 20:59:52] #11 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
Same thing as posted by binaryduke. So is it your understanding you should be paying a .75 commission to AMP per contract per side? Now this is excluding NFA and exchange fees. We have thought it should be more like .50. And also excluding the .10 order routing fee that we include. 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: 2020-01-15 21:00:12

[2020-01-15 21:06:30] #12 [Go To First Post]
nosast - Posts: 290
It's what is shown in AMPs commission calculator for TT. A roundturn costs 3.90 and if I add 0.20 for SC/TT routing a roundturn in total is 4.10. I traded 3 rt so the cost is 12.30 - all good at least for the total sum.

[2020-01-15 21:08:54] #13 [Go To First Post]
nosast - Posts: 290
Also, if you deposit 10k with AMP you can get the cost down to 3.60 incl. routing fees for ES. Here is their calculator for reference: https://application.ampclearing.com/account/commissionquote.aspx Date Time Of Last Edit: 2020-01-15 21:14:56

[2020-01-15 21:19:26] #14 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
Going through the commission calculator, it does not support the TT order routing solution that we offer. It shows a per contract fee of .30. 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

[2020-01-15 21:22:03] #15 [Go To First Post]
nosast - Posts: 290
Right. Just select TT and no platform and then add your 0.20. It would be nice if AMP can show the pricing with TT/SC Routing on their calculator for sure!

[2020-01-16 03:08:47] #16 [Go To First Post]
User13668 - Posts: 291
Slight divergence from current discussion: Re post #1 and this comment: "And there is a major advantage to use the Sierra Chart TT order routing versus CQG for CME group markets: -Permanent storage on the server of order fill history to create long-term, complete and accurate and consistently stable trading statistics and profit/loss calculations. -Web-based trading panel which can also be used by a mobile phone(available now) -Server managed bracket orders for safety and speed." FYI CQG does have a web based/mobile phone app trading panel. The only downside is you can only be logged into CQG on one device at a time. So to use/access CQG on their mobile phone app a trader would have to close their CQG connection in SC first (unless you pay an extra monthly fee for an additional login). Even without being logged into the CQG mobile phone app, I still get alerts from the CQG app on my phone every time an order is filled when I am trading on SC using CQG data. If I want to really really confirm I am flat, I disconnect the CQG connection in SC and then open the CQG mobile phone app (or web page via a browser).

[2020-01-16 06:10:55] #17 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
FYI CQG does have a web based/mobile phone app trading panel. The only downside is you can only be logged into CQG on one device at a time. So to use/access CQG on their mobile phone app a trader would have to close their CQG connection in SC first (unless you pay an extra monthly fee for an additional login). Yes we know about this, but like you said you cannot be logged in at the same time as Sierra Chart. Additionally unless you are with AMP this is a $25 cost to access this web-based trading panel from CQG. Sierra Chart also supports alerts as well: Global Trade Settings Windows: Play Alert When Order Filled (Global Settings >> General Trade Settings >> Notifications) Now these are generated from within Sierra Chart but we could generate them from the server and this is gradually the direction we are going in with a unified order routing architecture. And the server-side bracket orders is an absolutely monumental essential item. If you are with AMP there is no reason to be using CQG, if you are just trading the CME markets, and you are taking your trading seriously. 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: 2020-01-16 06:14:58

[2020-01-16 06:25:19] #18 [Go To First Post]
User893209 - Posts: 2
Yep there’s a Clearing TTNet fee of 0.50 / 0.10 per side (mini / micro) and according to AMP it’s regardless of the data feed used.

[2020-01-16 06:30:03] #19 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
But what we want definitive validation of, is when someone moves from CQG to TT, whether the overall transaction fees remain the same. 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

[2020-01-17 16:41:46] #20 [Go To First Post]
User136422 - Posts: 33
Any news on this ?

[2020-01-18 07:46:28] #21 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
If post #20 is asking about post #19, we are still waiting to hear from someone about this who has moved from CQG to Sierra Chart/TT. 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

[2020-01-18 21:10:48] #22 [Go To First Post]
User187858 - Posts: 12
Hello, I am a previous CQG user & I switched over to Sierra Charts Denali. I have been in contact with Sierra support & AMP about all this confusion. My attempts to speak to an educated personal at AMP seems to never happen, very rude employees. with that said I will switch really soon. Below is the reply i got from their Fee's department when i asked how much i was now being charged. """ ME: Hello. I recently transferred over to Sierra Charts Denali Data Feed. I want to get a better understanding of what I am being Charged per trade. From my understanding from the articles I'v read on the Sierra Charts Website we should only be getting charged routing fee's & broker AMP commissions. AMP: Hello, On a transaction basis, Sierra Chart charges a 0.10/side per contract order routing fee. In addition to that, all normal fees apply. You are charged by the exchange, the exchange fee (which varies by product). The NFA charges a 0.02/side per contract fee. There is a charge for clearing the trades (Clearing TTnet) and a commission fee from AMP. E-Mini Equities: 1.18 (exchange) + 0.02 (NFA) + 0.10 (SC Order Routing) + 0.50 (Clearing) + 0.25 (Commission) Micro E-Mini Equities: 0.20 (exchange) + 0.02 (NFA) + 0.10 (SC Order Routing) + 0.05 (Clearing) + 0.02 (Commission) """" 50 cents per contract for clearing seems expensive in my opinion.

[2020-01-18 21:22:08] #23 [Go To First Post]
Sierra Chart Engineering - Posts: 104368
Ok, but can you show us what you were charged previously when using CQG. We will make sure the fees remain the same. We will insist upon this. There are many good things coming with the TT based order routing. Next month we are going to do a direct cross connect to TT in the Aurora data center to ensure perfectly stable connectivity, under all conditions. We have not had a problem yet, but we just want to safeguard against any future potential problems. We are also going to add daily loss limit functionality. And expand our data feed offerings on Denali to cover more exchanges and hopefully be able to include exchanges like JPX futures and US stocks with market depth. Regarding the data feeds, this is a difficult area, and we do not know what the outcome will be but we should have a good sense of this, over the next 60 to 90 days. So this should only be understood as a statement of intention with no guarantees. 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: 2020-01-18 21:34:10

[2020-01-18 21:35:36] #24 [Go To First Post]
User187858 - Posts: 12
attached are two screen shots of some daily statements. one from CQG one from my recent billing with Clearing TTnet & SC TT TRF


Screen Shot 2020-01-18 at 4.29.00 PM.png / V - Attached On 2020-01-18 21:33:58 UTC - Size: 45.2 KB - 736 views Screen Shot 2020-01-18 at 4.30.27 PM.png / V - Attached On 2020-01-18 21:34:09 UTC - Size: 38.62 KB - 615 views

[2020-01-19 00:05:54] #25 [Go To First Post]
seandunaway - Posts: 213
It's very common for a broker to charge an additional "clearing fee" or "brokerage fee" in addition to their commission fee. This is additional profit for the broker and a result of brokers in a race to advertise the lowest commission. The reality is they just split their true commission into two fees. This additional fee can almost always be negotiated out, depending on your trading and risk activity. Yes, their FCM will charge them literally a couple pennies for clearing, but that can be covered out of their commission. CQG does not inherently have this additional clearing or brokerage fee. Any exchange non-member, with a new account, with the minimum deposit requirement, should near effortlessly be able to achieve an /ES trade for: $1.18 exchange (increases by $0.05 in 2/2020, by the way) $0.02 NFA $0.49 - $0.50 commission (volume discounts typically available, negotiable) $0.10 CQG routing fee (only $0.05 CQG routing fee if using FIX) for $1.79 per side or $3.58 per round turn expense all in. Alas, perhaps TT is more expensive to the FCM and that is being passed on to the broker and ultimately, the customer. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2020-01-19 00:39:29

To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: