Help Center Blog Open An Account

Sierracharts Alternative Data Feed Connections

Data-Feed

#1

I received this system message when logging into Sierra Chart the past few days. The CTS lower cost connection is being ended by Sierra Chart on May 31, 2019. With the help of Optimus Futures I am migrating to the new TT connection with Sierra Chart in the coming days.

CTS%20Lower%20Cost%20Connection%20Ending%20(seen%203-7-19)


#2

@simtrader Thank you for the notice, and I appreciate bringing this to our attention.
We spoke to Sierra and we will help customer onboarding the new arrangement with TT.
Optimus technical staff will create the onboarding process with a guide and video to make this transition to the new arrangement smooth. You are more than welcome to share your experience thereafter with concerning TT execution.

Thank you,
Matt Z
Optimus Futures
www.optimusfutures.com


#3

Matt, when the TT API connects to Sierra, would I be able to see the orders on TT or only Sierra? Both?


#4

That is a good question, and I assume that it is yes, but I will ask TT or SC to be sure. However, keep in mind that executing directly on TT would not have the same pricing. Also, if they require an additional login that would subject you to further market data fees. Executing directly on Sierra would keep it cheaper, but I understand if TT DOM is your choice of execution.

Thanks,
Matt Z
Optimus Futures
www.optimusfutures.com
800 771 6748
561 367 8686


#5

I’d be curious to know the answer too. This new TT combo is basically the same idea as what Sierra did with CTS a year or two ago (which I signed up for, now being abandoned). I remember thinking it might not be a bad idea if I could have some type of basic back-up/alternative way to see my positions other than in Sierra Chart. Like a basic web type access. In the end I didn’t follow it up and I never had a problem. But I don’t want to ever be in a situation where Sierra says I am flat but I’m not. Sierra is staffed with excellent programmers and they clearly want users to shift to this new service with TT so presumably they will make it work. It’s just always a little nervous when you know you’re the guinea pig for something new. I think there’s going to be some teething problems for some people. For example I’m not sure that the full list of FCMs that are being posted by Sierra as compatible with the service even know about it. The other thing that comes to mind is the $0.10 per side fee. Sierra are saying that they will/can collect it but they note that FCMs could collect it. I’d rather that the FCM do this and it appear on my statements, if you can please mention this to ADMIS, Matt :slight_smile:


#6

It would be easier for the FCM to collect on this from the customer’s account and we will work with ADMIS on this. Although technically software vendors could “see” the trading, I do not want to add another layer that FCM know how to do well for years.

Matt Z
Optimus Futures
www.optimusfutures.com


#7

The list is a generic list of companies that have TT. Many of these clearinghouses use X-Trader, and in my opinion have not implemented TT, let alone any knowledge of the new TT API on 3rd party.

When I set up my TT web, Optimus helped me with the setup, so I have no doubt they’ll configure this set up right.

Kevin


#8

I saw this post on another forum, so I wanted to add my two $.02 about Sierra.

For the longest time, I used DTN, while executing with Interactive Brokers. When I heard of Optimus, and their ability help with better execution, and support, I transferred my account. The first feed I was on was Rithmic, it was good, and Matt along with his team helped me configure Sierrachart and Rithmic Trader that allowed me to flatten out positions if there was a glitch by Sierra. As clearly stated by Sierra’s support, they are not fans of Rithmic, but this solution has worked for me. I do not know why Sierra does not like it, but the guys at Optimus Futures just made it work.

A few months while working on Rithmic, Sierra came with the CTS solution. So the “ideal solution” was getting the data from Sierrachart(white label of Barchart) and executing on CTS-T4. Ok, so I did it. What a mess of a configuration, and going back and forth between Sierra, and CTS-T4 support while trying to configure CTS without historicals so we can get the cheaper version. Sorry, there was nothing cheap about it because the frustration and lack of trading was the expensive part. About a month ago, Rithmic decided to drop the connection to ICE, and since I trade Brent Oil, I needed a new connection.

Matt hooked me up with CQG within minutes, and all worked well and still working well. I see no difference between CTS, Rithmic and CQG execution what so ever. Maybe (?) Rithmic was a bit better for CME, but I assume that is because it has servers in Aurora(?). I also switched to the Sierra data for historicals, and it is a good solution.

Now we have TT. Sorry, not going again for that one unless there is something I am truly missing. I would love to hear about the TT execution and order routing experience from those who have implemented it. Maybe it is a great solution, and if it works, I could be missing out. But I assume that as long as the data is driven by Sierra, they(Sierra) should not care what and who I use for execution.

Matt, Thank you for all the support and patience. Great Team! :medal_sports:

Cathrine


#9

@DayOnly,

Thanks for your few pennies.
I recently switched to Sierra Chart and after the initial frustration of the new layouts, millions of options I finally started seeing the light as it is such a stable and intuitive platform.

So, Initially I wasn’t clear on the difference between the incoming Sierra data (BarChart) and the separate execution data feed.

Once I started playing around with Sierra’s data and understood that you pull stable real time data for intraday Charts, DOM and separately execute with your choice of an execution data feed (OEC / Gain Capital for me at this time) it works great.

Also, the fact that Sierra’s data is clean and does not carry a heavy load of execution side, it made even more sense why so many traders love the Sierra combo.

I also, see the full Depth of Market (all price levels from High to Low of Day) and for now the data seems faster then my other retail and filtered data.

I am a bit intrigued to hear you mentioned that Sierra is not “fond” of Rithmic as I was under the impression Rithmic is a very solid player. I am currently using OEC / Gain Capital but will consider adding either CQG or Rithmic data feed in the near future through Sierra.

I am trading CME bundle-based instruments and curious of your Opinion @DayOnly,
while you seem to side with CQG.

And yes, I agree that @Mod-MattZ and the Optimus team is always on top of their game for their traders.

Thanks for your post.
Best Regards,

  • P11

#10

@DayOnly thank you for joining and the kind words.

Matt Z
Optimus Futures
www.optimusfutures.com


#11

@Project11 Sierra and Rithmic, let’s just call it programming quarrel. They have significant disagreements about how specific orders are being routed, executed and placed. The R-API order execution of OCO is set when the limit order is completed. While it is a limit order, All OCOs would reside on your computer. Typically, the entire bracket should sit on the server. I guess that is where the core of their disagreement is, but there could be other things. TO be honest, while I respect Sierra as a software company, Rithmic’s quality of execution and tick data is far superior to IB, TD, and TS.

CQG is good data feed, and the easy part is their integration to different FCMs on risk side is seamless. The API you use (Gain’s) is stable, and their clearing firm has done a good job with it.


#12

This mirrors my thinking. Sierra + Sierra’s own datafeed is awesome. I’m not that technical in my knowledge so I apply simple logic to my decisions. Forget about the lack of eye candy as a GUI, once you get to know Sierra Chart you get to see just how good it is as trading software. It’s a Rolls Royce. So I want the guy who sells me the Rolls Royce to be the guy pumping the gas into it. No matter what the original source of the gas (BarCharts), the guy who sells me the car tweaks it such that it works exactly right for the car. Fast, unfiltered, resource-light gas pumps into the car. If ever there’s a problem with the gas not working right for the car, it’s the same guy for both that will fix it. It is that simple for me. Anytime I see “datafeed” problems on the bulletin boards from people pumping third party gas into the Sierra car I groan. Maybe it’s perfectly fine but for $35/month, 100 symbols, why not pump the gas made especially for the car into the car? At least that’s my logic. Now, on the execution side, that’s where I don’t know what I don’t know. And that’s where Optimus Futures does know what I don’t know.