Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
I am using CQG and I can confirm that it is a very reliable and fast, even at busy opening session hours.
Also, they are good with further distances connection, above 200 msecs ping, like mine.
The only real difference I've noticed is that when you have a disconnect from your DSL
the CQG will take a lot longer to reconnect.
I've asked NT support about this and apparently CQG has a price server and a trade server.
The price server seems to reconnect faster than that trade server most of the time.
This means that I can see the price moving but if I have a 'live' order working when the disconnect occurs
I may not be able to exit or modify the trade until the trade server reconnects. Sometimes the only way to
get it to reconnect is to totally disconnect and reconnect.
I have not experienced the same issue with Zenfire or Rithmic.
I don't know if they use two servers or not, but the issue has never occurred for me.
Rejoice in the Thunderstorms of Life . . .
Knowing it's not about Clouds or Wind. . .
But Learning to Dance in the Rain ! ! !
I used Mike's suggestion to look at the amount of data send by the data feed and that is displayed in the MultiCharts QuoteManager.
I've only collected data during the European morning till mid-afternoon (the US opens in about 10 minutes), but the differences are already quite remarkable; the number of received ticks with CQG is around 3 times as much as with ZenFire! In other words, with the ZenFire data feed I'm only seeing one third of the market (is that a correct interpretation?).
I'm surprised by this, I didn't expect such a big difference. Does someone know what might cause this? I've double-checked my settings, all symbols are set to 'Fields to collect: bid, ask, trade; tick'.
(PS: I'm not saying the CQG is better because of the higher amount of ticks. It might be that CQG lags more or has more erroneous ticks than ZenFire, so overall CQG might not be better).
I'm inclined to agree with your interpretation, however today the difference is soo big, that I'm beginning to think something is wrong with the ZenFire API in MultiCharts 8.0. (I've already emailed MC support about this). Or I'm doing something very wrong.
For example, CQC send today for FESX @ EUREX almost one million (no, I'm not kidding) more ticks than ZenFire for the same symbol, periodicity and time period. And we still have 3.5 hours till Eurex closes, so the difference might increase further.
Hmm, so this means that the tick charts from the two feeds should look completely different! Could you perhaps post some, it might be a good way to judge how big the impact is in real life...
Yes that's right - NT/ZF only does 5 levels of the DOM. If MC do more, say 10 levels, then this will account for most of the difference. I have no experience with MC so do not know how many DOM levels you can display with CQG vs ZF.
Not sure who sent you this but I trade with ZF via Mirus and you only have to do FIVE RT's a month to avoid all fees - and in my view this is not unreasonable.