ATM strategy selection modes and multiple entries

[tomgilb]

The display of concurrent separate orders on the chart vary depending on how the ATM Strategy Selection mode is set after the fact, and the displays are confusing at best.

In order to even place a concurrent pending short and a long on the same chart, it must be set to Keep... If both orders fill, the entries are not displayed at all, only the stops and targets. If one reaches its target, an entry reappears, but at the level of the filled target of the closed order, not at the entry level of the remaining order. Why would anyone want this functionality? I would put this in the bug category.

If I set the mode to either Display... or Select..., I cannot enter opposing pending orders on the same chart. I must open a second chart ChartTrader (or DOM), one for longs and one for shorts.

If both modes are set to either Display... or Select..., and the pending long fills, then the pending short fills, the long is closed at a loss and the short is cancelled, but the long's stoploss remains pending. Who would want this functionality? I would also put this in the bug category.

If both modes are set to either Display... or Select..., and two orders are filled in the same direction (both longs or both shorts), the entry level is not even the average of the two but some other value between the two entries. Also, the stops and targets are merged at some seemingly arbitrary level. Very confusing, making multiple entries nearly impossible to manage.

I want to be able to be in a short and a long concurrently (or two longs or two shorts) with each entry segregated and each of the respective targets and stops also segregated, with each target fill or stop fill not affecting the other order, as if each of the trades were placed by individual traders. Will this be possible in NT7?

[NinjaTrader_Bertrand]

tomgilb, thanks for the suggestions in your post - unfortunately you're correct: to manage concurrent positions / ATM's independent from each other in the same market you would need to set the ATM strategy selection mode to 'Display Selected Only...' and use two charts / DOM's for the order entry.

http://www.ninjatrader-support.com/HelpGuideV6/StrategyMode.html

[tomgilb]

ATM strategy selection modes and multiple entries

Thanks, Bertrand, for your reply.

Even with two charts and both modes set to Display..., concurrent orders are not entirely separate. As it is, it's a screwed-up mess, and useless for what I want to do.

Will NT7 allow me to do what I want?

[NinjaTrader_Bertrand]

tomgilb, NinjaTrader 7 won't introduce changes in this regard - if both charts or DOM's are set to display the selected ATM strategy only you should see only the associated orders (stops and targets) displayed - I'm sorry - I don't follow 'where the mess' is entering the picture for you - could you please post a step by step example how I can reproduce this on my end here? Thanks

[tomgilb]

ATM strategy selection modes and multiple entries

The step by step is in my original post.

With one chart and the mode set to any of the three choices, it is a mess.

The mess is reduced with two charts and both modes set to Display... but the entry of one still shows on the other. At best, this is a workaround, not a solution.

Sorry to hear NT7 will not have any enhancements in this regard. Would the developers consider this as a suggestion?

[NinjaTrader_Kyle]

Hi tomgilb,

Thank you for your reply.

I will forward this on to my development team for further consideration.

[tomgilb]

ATM strategy selection modes and multiple entries

I'd like to continue the conversation with a specific situation of a concurrent long and short, with the ATM mode set to Keep...:

1) Assume a pending buy stop and a pending sell stop bracketing the current price.
2) If the long gets filled, its entry, target and stop are displayed, plus the pending sell stop. This is expected.
3) If the short then gets filled before the long hits its target or stop, the targets and stops of each order are displayed, but no entries are displayed. This is an omission.
4) If the long then fills its target, an entry reappears, but at the level of the long's filled target, not at the entry of the short. This is not expected.

This does not happen with two longs or two shorts. It only happens with opposing direction orders.

I think #3 is a Ninja idiosyncrasy, but #4 is a bug. What say you?

[NinjaTrader_Bertrand]

tomgilb, thanks for the detailed steps - both are expected, with two opposing orders and both then filled before any stops / targets got filled / cancelled (and mode in 'Keep) you're essentially flat in between with just the placed ATM exit orders working, thus showing an entry at this point then when of them hits and executes.

[tomgilb]

ATM strategy selection modes and multiple entries

OK, but what about #4? Is it a bug?

[NinjaTrader_Bertrand]

No, your old exits are still placed so one of them fills and this starts a new ATM then...

Best would be to replay those scenarios on the simulated feed with the trendslider thus giving ample time to see order placements taking place -

http://www.ninjatrader-support.com/HelpGuideV6/SimulatedDataFeed.html

[tomgilb]

That's lame. Why would this be something anyone would want? It's confusing, at best. At worst, you forget where you entered and you move your stops and targets to the wrong places.

Besides, it doesn't do it with two longs or two shorts, so the action is inconsistent.

As far as I'm concerned, it's a bug.

[NinjaTrader_Bertrand]

That's exactly why it's recommended to use 'Display Selected Only...' if you want to run concurrent ATM's in the same market, thus giving you easier visual display, if you want the other trade to cancel automatically for you, just link the entries via OCO.

[tomgilb]

That still doesn't explain why the action is inconsistent with two longs or two shorts.

And you cannot enter opposing direction orders with Display... unless you use two charts.

Like I said, it's lame.

I would find it unbelievable if there was no one at Ninja who agreed with me that this is a bug. Do you at least agree that this is not the optimum functionality?