(Not) Coincidentally I have been thinking the very same this morning. I too run many systems in parallel and on the same Instrument. But my thoughts for the cause were – and are a little different :
I know from PRT-IB what a gigantic mess it is going to be when more than one system is let loose on one Instument. From there you can see that nothing is made for it.
ehhh
No wait, with PRT-IG we can work with that ?
To me it is quite clear that PRT itself can deal with it, or else nothing would work with PRT-IG. Mind you, with IB it really is a mess because just nothing works. Orders stay In while they should Exit. Opposite orders can’t work at (cause is IB) all but *are* allowed. And …
… Take the opposite orders as an example. PRT surely and definitely can work with them. But not IB. And now things need to be prohibited or else all messes up. This is all about the communication with the broker, and my ongoing more knowledge about this because of so many issues with manual trading (the 200+ tickets for that, all unsolved).
Okay …
So now we have these several running systems, and they communicate over the order IDs. We can see on the failed Entries that there’s no Order ID applicable (it is just not there yet). You can see the assigned Order-ID’s in the top part of the screenshot below and the not-yet-assigned in the bottom half; you can see this by the right-most column where instead of the Order-ID your Account-ID shows.
Now what if the Account-ID as the communication means mixes up the orders and from there the PRT software fails badly. All it requires is two orders at the same time (same beginning of the next bar). For me it now seems logical that with the account-ID as the key (think database now), this just can not work.
This not unique key over functional several orders looks to be in order definitely for not yet put-through orders (your question to the broker “can I place this order please”). But what about the already running positions then ? they goo out (are stopped) just the same for various uncomprehensible reasons;
From IB I know that in a 6 second Strategy the time required to place the order, is often too short (I have the videos of it). Thus, IB answers too slow. The cause thus is IB ? well, Yes, but PRT can’t cope with that situation and starts to mess up. Envision : No response from the broker after 6 seconds and there comes my next pending stop order already, that too handed to the broker. But that can’t be because PRT first kills the order from the previous bar. Well, by that time the broker responds finally to the order of the previous bar but for PRT that order does not exist any more. Unexpected situation and BOOM out is my System. With this story, the videos clearly show this. It is only that I have to make the story regarding what I see. But it is almost by guarantee that my story is correct, already because I can predict the situations and know via the code how to avoid them.
Now don’t you ever think that PRT solved this even the slightest. Beta tester for PRT-IB Autotrading, all made clear by video and all (not seen in Paris) and I hear nothing back about it in even (on estimate) 2 months of time.
OK, that was IB. Now I wouldn’t know why the PRT software suddenly would work fine regarding this communication between provider (PRT) and Broker (IG) . I know for many facts what IG all can incur for, and I most certainly know what PRT “refuses” to cope with (IB story above).
And now the intermittent conclusion :
Because the both don’t communicate very well all sorts of strange messages are thrown at us. Or maybe not strange messages per se, but what about messages applying to orders which are the wrong ones. If that communication does not understand – now we even understand less.
IG applies her new trickery to earn some more money, but IG is known for living on her island and ProRealTime is not told about this. Next for us another thing stops working (well).
But GraHal, in the base you are right, I think. I don’t know what right today makes us think about the several systems in parallel for a cause, but that in itself will be no coincidence. I don’t know what made me think so this morning; maybe psychics of human can let this surface. Then probably that would be a good starting point.
.
