Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

bakrob99

CME Changes to the Transaction Reporting Process

Recommended Posts

I received an email yesterday which alerted me to the fact that the CME has changed the way they report transactions. I am told that previoulsy, some transaction were lumped together when reported resulting in tick bar values which were inaccurate. They have now corrected this. The point of the email was:

 

If you use tick charts to trade e-mini S&Ps, you may have noticed an increase in the speed with which your charting software produces tick bars on Monday and today from the speed that it produced the same size tick bars on Friday.

 

As of Sunday, October 4th, the CME Group enhanced the reporting of trades to provide more information at greater speed. The effect of this upgrade is to produce more ticks over the same price action than were produced before.

 

You can get more information at http://www.cmegroup.com/globex/files/EquityFuturesEnhancements.pdf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I set up a Chart with 10,000 tick bars and compared the last several weeks with the 2 days this week. There is no doubt that these changes are significant. You can see about twice the number of bars for the day, compared to the prior days.

2009-10-07_0752_Tick_Chart_Change_at_CME.thumb.png.82c635767f4aa39f1adefd8edc3a3cf9.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it only on the ES?

 

I'm not noticing the same stuff on the NQ...

 

*edit*... now i maybe am.... I just took a look at the 10000 tick bar on the nq and there is a noticeable wider day starting on the 5th...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe that it applies to all Stock Index futures but not commodities (Metals, Energy) I am not sure about Futures like Currency futures on the CME. I will have to do some more homework on these.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am not sure about Futures like Currency futures on the CME. I will have to do some more homework on these.

 

They changed the behavior for the Currency futures some weeks ago. I wondered some weeks ago why the T/S shows 1 lot trades on over 97 % compared to the days before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I can tell this 2.5 rule is bullshit.

 

I just did my own analysis, average bars per day on different tick charts prior to the 5th, and post 5th... and if you do a standard (your tick timeframe) X 2.5 = (your new tick timeframe) you won't be trading the same "timeframe" as before if you get my meaning.

 

By their standards, a 233T should be a 582T. (233X2.5).

 

What I found was that a 233T prior to the 5th is closest to a 400T afterwards. Which means the actual conversion is closer to 1.5X's to 1.75X's as much data, but certainly not 2.5x's as much.

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=14188&stc=1&d=1255293197

 

 

I've attached a barcounter.eld for tradestation users to do their own conversions.

 

Cheers!

BARCOUNTER.ELD

Untitled.png.269e73b206e7303ee5a1839248ac702d.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the current (Post Oct. 4th) Avg. 3-day Tick Stats.

Also see one of my prior test for @ES.D and @NQ.D (in Excel).

 

I think it is approximately twice the number of bars in @ES.D and @NQ.D

after Oct. 4th.

 

Regards,

Suri

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=14190&stc=1&d=1255299634

 

attachment.php?attachmentid=14191&stc=1&d=1255299634

TICKBarStats_Oct0909.gif.b2ba862bd7dc41c26422ae1d253cff75.gif

esnqbartimes_2008.thumb.gif.256efe04f0cb0860445ad1294c20aa06.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The new feed makes my tick charts much more choppy. The difference is a factor of about 2.5. (2.5 more data is being sent since breaking up large orders in their data feed). I scalp the YM with 89 tick charts, I found that multipling 89 times the 2.5 factor give me a 223 tick chart which "smooths" out the chart -- bringing me back to where it used to be, so to speak. Those of you who use tick charts might want to try this and see how it works out for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The post I made earlier was based on very limited data. After reviewing a full week after the change, there were 820k trades during the day sessions of the past week (on the ES) versus 1.55m the previous week. So based on this information, the multiplier should be 1.89. However, the volume was about 30% lighter this week than it was last week. Therefore, the multiplier should be increased by 30% as well bring it back to 2.46 which is very close to my original number (2.5), so I'll stick with that number for now.

 

Some recommended conversions for tickbar periodicities below:

 

233t becomes 582t

377t becomes 942t

 

However, I believe numbers like 233 and 377 were chosen because they are numbers in the Fibonacci sequence. So if that is more important than maintaining the same number of bars as before, it might make more sense to change 233 to 610....and 377 to 987.

Edited by LS_Chad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One correction to my post above, the 820k trades were for the week beginning Sept 28th (week before CME change). The 1.55m are for the week beginning Oct 5th (week after the change). I reported those backwards above. And these were for the day session only (ignoring overnight trades).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Bakrob and Daedulous. I had taken a snapshot of 5days of data, 3days before and 2 day after and saw the same results as mentioned. Unfortunately right after I sent that file to my mentor to comment upon, I deleted the email and have no attachment to accompany with this post.

 

Transferring to a 2.5x factor worked for a few days and not everyday on my tick charts. Which could be attributed to both lack of testing and/or low volume days or both. For now 2.5x remains the de facto change, but transferring to range bars has helped. They can hide volume, ticks, T&S and trade size but can't hide price action itself..can they?

 

I can't seem to notice the difference on the currency futures but that could be lack of observation as well.

 

And of course Barry Taylor at emini watch.com has a take on it as well (CME Says Better, Faster, Cheaper – I Don’t Think So). And this is a view which is entirely logical and cogent.

 

BTW - my mentor has moved to 2.5x on the ES.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Be careful who you blame.   I can tell you one thing for sure.   Effective traders don’t blame others when things start to go wrong.   You can hang onto your tendency to play the victim, or the martyr… but if you want to achieve in trading, you have to be prepared to take responsibility.   People assign reasons to outcomes, whether based on internal or external factors.   When traders face losses, it's common for them to blame bad luck, poor advice, or other external factors, rather than reflecting on their own personal attributes like arrogance, fear, or greed.   This is a challenging lesson to grasp in your trading journey, but one that holds immense value.   This is called attribution theory. Taking responsibility for your actions is the key to improving your trading skills. Pause and ask yourself - What role did I play in my financial decisions?   After all, you were the one who listened to that source, and decided to act on that trade based on the rumour. Attributing results solely to external circumstances is what is known as having an ‘external locus of control’.   It's a concept coined by psychologist Julian Rotter in 1954. A trader with an external locus of control might say, "I made a profit because the markets are currently favourable."   Instead, strive to develop an "internal locus of control" and take ownership of your actions.   Assume that all trading results are within your realm of responsibility and actively seek ways to improve your own behaviour.   This is the fastest route to enhancing your trading abilities. A trader with an internal locus of control might proudly state, "My equity curve is rising because I am a disciplined trader who faithfully follows my trading plan." Author: Louise Bedford Source: https://www.tradinggame.com.au/
    • SELF IMPROVEMENT.   The whole self-help industry began when Dale Carnegie published How to Win Friends and Influence People in 1936. Then came other classics like Think And Grow Rich by Napoleon Hill, Awaken the Giant Within by Tony Robbins toward the end of the century.   Today, teaching people how to improve themselves is a business. A pure ruthless business where some people sell utter bullshit.   There are broke Instagrammers and YouTubers with literally no solid background teaching men how to be attractive to women, how to begin a start-up, how to become successful — most of these guys speaking nothing more than hollow motivational words and cliche stuff. They waste your time. Some of these people who present themselves as hugely successful also give talks and write books.   There are so many books on financial advice, self-improvement, love, etc and some people actually try to read them. They are a waste of time, mostly.   When you start reading a dozen books on finance you realize that they all say the same stuff.   You are not going to live forever in the learning phase. Don't procrastinate by reading bull-shit or the same good knowledge in 10 books. What we ought to do is choose wisely.   Yes. A good book can change your life, given you do what it asks you to do.   All the books I have named up to now are worthy of reading. Tim Ferriss, Simon Sinek, Robert Greene — these guys are worthy of reading. These guys teach what others don't. Their books are unique and actually, come from relevant and successful people.   When Richard Branson writes a book about entrepreneurship, go read it. Every line in that book is said by one of the greatest entrepreneurs of our time.   When a Chinese millionaire( he claims to be) Youtuber who releases a video titled “Why reading books keeps you broke” and a year later another one “My recommendation of books for grand success” you should be wise to tell him to jump from Victoria Falls.   These self-improvement gurus sell you delusions.   They say they have those little tricks that only they know that if you use, everything in your life will be perfect. Those little tricks. We are just “making of a to-do-list before sleeping” away from becoming the next Bill Gates.   There are no little tricks.   There is no success-mantra.   Self-improvement is a trap for 99% of the people. You can't do that unless you are very, very strong.   If you are looking for easy ways, you will only keep wasting your time forgetting that your time on this planet is limited, as alive humans that is.   Also, I feel that people who claim to read like a book a day or promote it are idiots. You retain nothing. When you do read a good book, you read slow, sometimes a whole paragraph, again and again, dwelling on it, trying to internalize its knowledge. You try to understand. You think. It takes time.   It's better to read a good book 10 times than 1000 stupid ones.   So be choosy. Read from the guys who actually know something, not some wannabe ‘influencers’.   Edit: Think And Grow Rich was written as a result of a project assigned to Napoleon Hill by Andrew Carnegie(the 2nd richest man in recent history). He was asked to study the most successful people on the planet and document which characteristics made them great. He did extensive work in studying hundreds of the most successful people of that time. The result was that little book.   Nowadays some people just study Instagram algorithms and think of themselves as a Dale Carnegie or Anthony Robbins. By Nupur Nishant, Quora Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/    
    • there is no avoiding loses to be honest, its just how the market is. you win some and hopefully more, but u do lose some. 
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
    • $CSCO Cisco Systems stock, nice top of range breakout, from Stocks to Watch at https://stockconsultant.com/?CSCOSEPN Septerna stock watch for a bottom breakout, good upside price gap
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.