Is autotrading possible with a DC using Metatrader? - page 5
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
То что ты дал команду купить ещё ничего не значит.
It clearly follows from the text of the law that a client must be notified if his trade order has been ignored by the broker. If this is the case, then the existing logic of MT not to provide such information to the trader violates the law.
I've encountered a lot of loss of connection with foreign DCs
I'm looking at one now and it's been like this for a few hours
maybe that was the cause of the problem?
if so, we need to duplicate the connection
No, only one pair had a trick, the others were working fine.Well this can be solved by creating a local copy of the data, it would even work faster - no need to constantly scan the same thing. By the way, exchanging data between terminals with another DC may help to keep up to date with quotes.
And I wonder if terminal log is considered as a proof of the command? Or for example to prove that command was sent we should use some external traffic copier? Maybe who knows?
In my case, they were showing me their log, everything that came from my IP address in the said time period. Everything is in order. They also claimed that they had no problems with the quote provider. They were not interested in my log, which shows that quotes for one pair did not come for hours and the Expert Advisor was not working, because it is executed after the arrival of the quote. If there is no quote, there is no work.
Их вовсе не интересовал мой лог, в котором видно, что по одной паре часами не приходили котировки и експерт бездействовал, он ведь исолняется по приходу котировки. Нет ее - нет работы.
The whole question is how much money you have lost (to make it worth the effort) and what the lawyer will say.
You could even file a representative action to compensate all traders for possible damages if the court decides that the law has been broken.
I think you should consult a solicitor about suing the MT developers for stopping the quotes that caused the damage. The law seems to be on your side as it is a direct duty of the broker to supply you with important information about making or failing to make them and you received the MT from the broker. If the Metacvots manage to pin the blame on the broker, it makes no difference to you. You have the terminal log as proof. It is true that the log is in text format and easily faked, but apparently the proof of "faking" must lie with the matakwots and not with you, since in this format the information is provided to you by them and you have provided it to the court.
The whole question is how much money you have lost (to make it worth the effort) and what the lawyer will say.
The sheepskin is not worth the effort. The question for me now is whether there is a sheepskin at all....
овчинка не стоит выделки. Вопрос сейчас для меня, есть ли овчинка вообще....
And how much, if not a secret, did you lose if the broker had then executed your commands on the real quotes?
It clearly follows from the text of the law that a client must be notified if his trade order has been ignored by the broker. If this is the case, then the existing logic of MT not to provide such information to the trader violates the law.
You are talking about BROKERS and linking them to DCs. A DC is not a broker, at best a dealer. And if we are talking about the CIS DCs, they are not even dealers, but bookmakers, because all of them (or the vast majority) have betting licences which in no way link their activities with dealing, let alone with brokering. The client does not and cannot, by definition, have any proof (for the court). Neither terminal logs nor emails belong to it. What is stored on the server can be changed by the brokerage company. Even if you sue, there is practically no chance of winning.
And how much, if not a secret, did you lose if the broker had then executed your commands on the real quotes?
a little bit :) As I've written before, it's not the one-time losses that bother me, it's the fact that you can be cheated all the time, and if you don't follow the flow of quotes, you'll never see it. I don't know how many moments like this I've missed without knowing anything either. The terminal will not trade, only give you reports of orders that are not tracked by your trading system.... And if you ask what's wrong, they'll say - we're doing fine, we're executing whatever you tell us to, here are the logs....
1. Вы говорите о БРОКЕРАХ и привязываете их к ДЦ. ДЦ не брокер, в лучшем случае дилер. А если говорить о СНГовых ДЦ, то даже не дилер, а букмекер, ибо все они (или подавляющее большинство) имеют букмекерские лицензии никоим образом не связывающие их деятельность с дилерской, а уж тем более брокерской.
2. Доказательной базы (для суда) у клиента нет и не может быть по определению. Ни логи терминала ни емейлы к ней не относятся. То что хранится на сервере ДЦ может быть изменено самим ДЦ. Если даже подадите в суд, то шансов на выигрыш практически нет.
1. Read the first paragraph of the law carefully. What exactly you call those who carry out transactions on your behalf with securities or what they call themselves is not important, the main thing is what the law calls them, i.e. whether they carry out transactions for your money and on your behalf. This is quite clear from the law, but you should consult a lawyer.
2. I'm not sure about emails - an email sent is usually evidence. Even a screenshot.
I wonder why you think that the client's information about his commands to the "broker" cannot be by definition? That is exactly what is required of those who do the brokerage business (definition according to what the law defines).
By the way, does anyone know of an expert who can help trace non-submission of quotes? I would like to check the DC for lousiness.