Stop Loss doesn't work any more - to lose is to lose. - page 6
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
You would familiarise yourself with the generally accepted terminology and mechanism for executing transactions.
In order to execute a trade, an order (Market Order) is sent out to open a trade on the market. So this order requires a CS. That is why the trade was not executed.
In this case you will not see a market order in the stack.
Are you ignoring the facts? A counter close order does not need an additional GO. Familiarize yourself with the terms - I have done so before
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing of trading strategies
Fins in the stack - trying to understand what happened by ticks
Aleksey Vyazmikin, 2019.04.20 17:25
I read about indicative quotes here- it became clearer, in general it is a separate type of trading, i.e. not our case - we exclude it for now.
Citizens, why are you arguing about order types (categories) when everything is clearly written in the rules?
7.10. An Order submitted to the Trading System must contain a reference to a category:
Are you ignoring the facts? A counter application for closure does not require an additional CS. Familiarise yourself with the terms - I have done so before
And what type of order is sent when a Stop Loss is triggered? In what line of your quote is it written ?
2. Who told you that a counter-order does not need an additional SE? For example the price was moving against your position and then the liquidity drops drastically, which is not uncommon for less liquid instruments.
Your closing order must match the same opposite order. Otherwise, the trade won't go through. So, if the opposite order will stand very far, then for execution of such transaction it will be required money to cover the loss of the current position and loss on a new deal which will take place on your order. This is an exaggerated description, but in reality it can happen.
3. You are arguing for the sake of arguing. The stock exchange is not forex. There are pitfalls everywhere. Study them first. Trade on the demo.
You cite some ridiculous quotes that do not determine how the stoploss is triggered. And you don't give any figures.
I'll explain it to you in a nutshell.
Let's say you have 100 roubles and a leverage of 1:10. You buy an asset for 2 contracts at 100. Then there is a collapse on the exchange and the price of the asset Lust, i.e. the last trade for example = 80. And the bid price = 20. You have a stop loss at 70. And the next flipper comes in = 60. At the same time the Bid remains = 20. You have triggered a stop loss. Which should activate at price = 20. As a result, you are in deficit for 160 rubles on the outcome of the transaction and your balance turns out - minus 60 rubles. Naturally, the exchange market will require you to compensate for the losses of your trade. And you are stupidly will not have these 60 rubles. What to do? To avoid you getting in such a situation, came up with the CS.
There is no word "Stop Loss" in your quotes. There is only a classification of orders. What was the purpose of that quote? Why did you attach indicative quotes to it ?
Have you ever heard of chains of logic? I, for one, do not see any logic in your quotes.
In general, sort it out on your own if you like. I hope to see the results of your investigations in this thread.
There is no word "stoploss" in your quotes. There is only the classification of orders. What was the point of this particular quote ? Why did you attach indicative quotes to it?
Have you ever heard of chains of logic? I, for one, do not see any logic in your quotes.
In general, sort it out on your own if you like. I hope to see the results of your investigations in this thread.
There is a document "Rules of organized trading on the derivatives market of the Moscow Exchange"- I quote it and there is no concept of Stop Loss, so I gave you a list of applications that are actually sent to the exchange, including a "market order", which is executed Stop Loss, which serves as a deferred conditional order to the broker to implement the trading operation in the market.
Surprisingly, I don't see any logical responses to my posts, rather a desire to bend the line and not see the new circumstances that were explained to you earlier.
You have not contributed in any way to the proceedings, have not found any documents, have not been able to give your assessment of the situation, so I am only frustrated that I tried in vain to come to a constructive dialogue.
Once again, there are no market orders, no stop loss, no take profit! This is all slang!
In the exchange core system, there are only pending orders. And depending on the type of order and the place of its execution, its behaviour is set.
buy limit lower than bid - is set as a pending order, to buy at the best price (bid in the ticker).
sell limit above offer - it is set as a pending order, sell at the best price (bid in the bull)
buy limit above offer - put above bid, and since it is a limit, it is executed immediately for the nearest offer (it's market, on the market, as you like or call it so)
sell limit below bid - put below demand, and since it is a limit, it is executed at the nearest bid (or market, on the market, or whatever you like to call it)
buy stop - it is set as a pending order, to buy at the worst price, the order is executed as buy limit above offer(it's market, on the market, as you like or call it so)
sell stop - it is set as a pending order, to sell at the worse price, the order is executed as sell limit below bid (it's market, on the market, as you like or call it)
buy stop limit - it is set as a pending order with condition of slippage, it is executed as buy limit above offer (also market, on the market, or whatever you want to call it)
sell stop limit - placed as a pending order with slippage condition, executed as sell limit below bid (also market, or market, or market as you like)
Market, market, take profit, stop loss, trawl, etc., there are no such orders, this is slang!
Market, market, take profit, stop loss, trawl, etc., there are no such orders, it's slang !
There are limit and market orders - these concepts are official for the Moscow Exchange. The question of their technical implementation is secondary - it is clear that you cannot buy/sell at once, it all happens through convergence with a certain frequency.
All other variations are implemented via the terminal on the broker's server and are also poured into limit or market orders when certain conditions occur.Let's not argue about blanks, but pay attention to this part of the document "PRINCIPLES OF NCC (JSC) WARRANTY BENEFITS ON THE DURING MARKET"
"
The current values of risk-parameters set by the Clearing Centre in accordance with the Methodology for Determination of Risk Parameters of the Derivatives Market of PJSC Moscow Exchange by NCO NCC (JSC) shall be published on the Clearing Centre's website.
...
Article 4 Position Aggregation for the purpose of calculation of the Collateral, Rules for accounting of calendar spreads and parameters for accounting of expiry risks
4.1 For the purpose of calculation of the Collateral for the Settlement Code, the position for each Instrument shall be calculated by adding the volumes of the positions accounted for on the position accounting register sections.
4.2 For the purpose of calculation of the Collateral of the Brokerage Firm, the positions accounted on the position accounting register sections may be grouped according to one of the rules:
4.2.1. when applying the Account Aggregation Rule - Netting, the position shall be calculated similarly to clause 4.1 of these Principles.
4.2.2 When applying the Account Aggregation Rule - "Netting", the Brokerage Firm position is not calculated. Risks of the positions accounted on the position accounting register sections shall be calculated and further aggregated according to clause 5.7.9 of these Principles.
4.3 The aggregation rule for each Brokerage Firm shall be set by the Clearing Member by submission of the application.
...
5.7.9 When calculating the financial result for the positions accounted on the Brokerage Firm, when selecting the Account Aggregation Rule "Semi-Account Aggregation", the financial results calculated on the basis of par. 5.7.6. the financial result for the positions accounted on the position accounting register shall be added up.
...
5.7.6. The financial results on the basis of the First, Second and Third groups of joint scenarios are added up.
"
As I understand it, the broker has to ensure that these rules are met at the time of clearing, and implements the client CS control itself, or am I mistaken and this is done through the NCC (JSC) clearing firm's software!
Further, it turns out that there are two options for accounting for CS on open positions - consolidated and separate - "Netting" and "Semi-Netting" - the size of CS at different brokers depends on this - and who knows which option Otkritie broker has chosen? "Netting" seems more predictable and understandable, but "Polunetting", as I understand it, is more profitable if one considers that most of them drain on the exchange and the calculation is consolidated for all positions.
In my opinion, the argument is misplaced. Due to the lack of a clear concept of TERM.
Logically, stops may just as well be replaced by opposite orders (which is, in fact, what happens). The question of priority on execution - that's a yes.