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 changed something, somewhere, and I can't figure out what it was or what I did.
In the last few days when I submit a pending order into the market, with its auto-attached profit target and stop loss, the attached OCO order seems to go live immediately instead of being in a pending state, pending the fill for the entry order.
Where can I correct this?
As an example, I put a short in at 34.50 which is above the market, so it's pending fill. The attached profit target order is at 24.50. You can see it appears to be live in the market, instead of pending the fill of the entry order. It used to say "pending" on the order status tag.
This is from the IB /Sierra setup guide (I believe you are with IB).
Which have you selected? IB to manage OCO's server side or Sierra. Note Sierra suggest IB doing it may not work reliably - whatever that is supposed to mean!
I'll check but don't think that's the issue. The attached orders shouldn't be submitted until the entry order is filled, the OCO isn't part of the equation in that way yet
If you do indeed have the option ticked for IB to manage the OCO's server side (as outlined in my first message) then it looks like Sierra no longer treats it as a child order as the management has been handed off to IB.
If you go to post #8 and look at the 2nd chart attachment. Although that posters issue is different to yours, you can see his parent and child orders appear as yours do - and he is using IB.
Also reference posts #40, 41 and 43 would tend to suggest Sierra has 'washed it's hands' of the child orders once handed to IB for management.
Regarding item 20 in that help document, I have no such options in build 1203 unless I am blind. I checked all the general tabs, I checked the data service options, I don't see anything to do with OCO's.
The option you need to uncheck is Global Settings >> General Trade Settings >> Use Server-Side OCO and Bracket Orders.
As far as our statement about IB OCO bracket orders not working reliably and not being specific about it, this is based upon various problems we have heard about over the years. We use a general statement because it can be hard to explain them or explain all of them and we may not fully understand the particular problem the user encounters.
The recent issues with a IB managed bracket orders, were on the Sierra Chart side and just due to unexpected problems encountered when IB is managing the orders.
Thanks, found it. I was looking at "General Settings" not "General Trade Settings".
So with this now unchecked, attached OCO orders should stay "pending" (local) until the entry order is filled, and then they are submitted to the broker, right?
With this option unchecked, once the entry order is filled, the attached PT/SL orders are still OCO on the broker right (using IB as an example)? I don't want local OCO for PT/SL orders. All I want is the PT/SL attached orders to be "pending" until the entry order is filled.
Mike. I don't use IB but I do use Sierra. I think your assumption is wrong. If you un tick that option then only Sierra is managing the OCO. If you have a disconnect issue then you could be exposed. My reading between the lines is that if you have the option ticked the child orders are managed by IB and are not live at the exchange until the parent is filled. It is just that Sierra is not labelling them as a child as I B are now managing the process. So I believe for max protection the option should be ticked. But given I don't use IB, Sierra or IB should confirm.
Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future - Niels Bohr, Danish Physicist