Home >> Support Board

Support Board

Date/Time: Thu, 25 Apr 2024 23:43:48 +0000

How to Post a Message for Support

Partial Fills Messing Up Trade Management + SL Movement

View Count: 514

[2022-10-28 10:15:20] #1 [Go To First Post]
User538960 - Posts: 29
Dear SC Support Team, I have two issues/requests I would like to present today, please: 1. Partial Fills Messing Up Trade Management By now I have experienced at least twice that the automated trade management gets messed up (as in adjusting the quantity of remaining contracts in a wrong way), whenever a take profit target is only filled partially. Today I had a short trade, into which I scaled in, ending up with 5 short contracts before the 1st take profit target got reached. Unfortunately, only 1 of the 5 contracts got filled there. Because I set the trade management in a way that the stop loss gets moved to break even + 2 ticks when the "OCO group 1" gets triggered, the SL was then moved to that position. But instead of adjusting the quantity of contracts to 4 now because of the partial fill of one contract, it remained at 5. That in turn led to 5 contracts being bought when that SL got hit, instead of only 4, which resulted in a "reverse position" for one contract, which I then had to flatten manually, as soon as I noticed it. A trade that should have been a winning trade ended up losing money. Can you please look into fixing this problem? That would be appreciated. I attached a screenshot of the Trade Activity of that particular trade along with a few annotations. That above trade leads me to the second issue/request, which I'd like to address on this occasion: 2. SL to Breakeven Functionality ("Trigger OCO Group"): As it is now, the "Move to Breakeven for Stop" functionality, when set to "Trigger OCO Group 1", moves the stop loss whenever at least ONE of the contracts is filled on the 1st take profit (so, also in case of a partial fill, only). Is there a chance you might implement an (optional) functionality that this function only gets triggered if ALL contracts of that take profit order are filled (complete fill)? That would be a very welcome feature which would be highly appreciated. (Now, you might say that I could make sure that all contracts are filled before the SL is moved by choosing the "Offset in Ticks Triggered" option and then choosing a trigger offset which is 1 tick more than the initial take profit in ticks. However, unfortunately that is not possible for me, because I sometimes adjust the take profit distance when already in the trade.) Thank you very much in advance for looking into it and your feedback.


Problem with Partial Fills.jpg / V - Attached On 2022-10-28 10:12:02 UTC - Size: 232.95 KB - 82 views

[2022-10-28 12:08:34] #2 [Go To First Post]
Sierra_Chart Engineering - Posts: 14092
1. Is this consistently reproducible? It does not sound like anything Sierra Chart would have control over. This sounds like a problem with the external trading service. We do not see how this could be a problem in Sierra Chart. That is very very unlikely. 2. We will look into adding this option. 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, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing

[2022-10-28 15:51:19] #3 [Go To First Post]
User538960 - Posts: 29
Thank you for your response. 1. Well, it happened at least twice. Fortunately partial fills have been relatively rare. But for the same reason of course it's a bit tough to try and reproduce it. Unless I use a ridiculously large position size (but maybe the problem only occurs if only ONE contract is filled...) But of course I would only do that in SIM, which then would take the trading service out of the equation. Do you want me to try and reproduce it in SC's SIM mode then? And if I can't reproduce it there, we assume it's a Rithmic issue? (By the way: I'd prefer using your Teton order routing, but unfortunately it is a funded evaluation firm's account. And they all use Rithmic, so I don't have a choice.) EDIT: By the way: A comparable issue had been reported by me already in the past. But I haven't received any more feedback on it by you since early August: Undesired partial reversal of trade (automatic opening of a trade in the other direction) 2. That would be awesome, thank you. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2022-10-28 15:57:19

[2022-10-28 19:55:29] #4 [Go To First Post]
Sierra_Chart Engineering - Posts: 14092
1. You cannot do partial fills in simulation and we do not think you would be able to reproduce it in simulation: Do you want me to try and reproduce it in SC's SIM mode then? And if I can't reproduce it there, we assume it's a Rithmic issue? We really do not believe this is a problem on the Sierra Chart side. What we recommend you do is carefully analyze the Trade Activity Log and see what has happened to the quantity modifications for the order: Trade Activity Log 2. This is already available: Global Trade Settings Windows: Require Full Fill of Target for Move to Breakeven Attached Order (Global Settings >> Chart Trade Settings >> General >> Order Entry) 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, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2022-10-28 19:56:53

[2022-10-31 15:08:24] #5 [Go To First Post]
User538960 - Posts: 29
1. I thought I remembered that the fills were pretty realistic on the few occasions I used SIM in the past (e.g. not always getting filled on touch of price etc.). But maybe I was wrong. 2. I was happy to read that this function is available and immediately activated it today. However, to my disappointment it did not work at all in two trades I took today (in 2 different accounts (both using Rithmic order routing)). All contracts that were sitting at my 1st take profit were filled in both cases, however NOTHING happened to the stop loss. It was supposed to get moved to breakeven + 2 acc. to my settings in both cases...but that did not happen. I could not really figure it out from the trade activity logs what the issue was. It seemed that while the complete fill of the order was considered for the modification of the remaining contract quantity at the stop loss order, the supposed movement to BE+2 as per my settings was completely ignored in both trades. Could it be that this function is just not working properly, yet? On a side note: I modified the quantity of contracts held at the TP 1 order whilst in the trade in both cases. (Because unfortunately proper even distribution in case of scaling in with single contracts on additional entries I asked for in mid September ( Scaling In: Even Distribution + Adjusting Take Profit Order Based on Average Entry Price ) apparently still isn't available, so the contract quantities are always heavily skewed to one take profit order, which is why I sometimes modify them, distributing them more evenly manually.) It appears that those quantity modifications also sometimes lead to issues. Maybe also in this case?... EDIT: In one of the trades I INCREASED the quantity of contracts at TP1, in the other one I DECREASED it. Date Time Of Last Edit: 2022-10-31 15:26:13

[2022-11-03 10:54:56] #6 [Go To First Post]
Sierra_Chart Engineering - Posts: 14092
2. The issue with this has been fixed. It is in the latest prerelease of Sierra Chart now. Also refer to this post here: Scaling In: Even Distribution + Adjusting Take Profit Order Based on Average Entry Price \| Post: 325980 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, use the Teton service: Sierra Chart Teton Futures Order Routing Date Time Of Last Edit: 2022-11-03 11:35:01

[2022-11-03 17:45:54] #7 [Go To First Post]
User538960 - Posts: 29
That is great news. Thank you very much!

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