Jump to content

Again, Unknown Closing of position despite Guaranteed Stop-loss.


Recommended Posts

I don't get whats with the IG platform nowadays, I faced a similar issue a week ago on the 8th Apr '20.

 

Can someone please explain why a +5 CHF/JPY @111.510 open position might close at 111.05, when I had already set the Guaranteed Stop-loss at 109.01. Moreover, the stop-loss min. is 223 bps, so I don't really understand how the position was closed by the system automatically.

Even with 30% slippage, this would result in paring back to roughly 175 bps and that should bring that stop-loss in at 109.76

 

The following illustrates when I check back on my Transaction and Activity history.

Transaction history shows Closing at 111.005

Unknown_Transaction.thumb.JPG.3bb7eae582959eb580c90fafe7aec5b5.JPG

Activity History shows that I had specifically amended the Guaranteed Stop-loss at 109.01

1717483697_UnknownClosingofposition.thumb.JPG.a34bcb6b95359264345344e2cd810e4e.JPG

The below shows an example IF I had accidentally or purposefully executed the closing myself. In the case below, I had closed a position on my Smartphone.

1429193221_UnknownClosingofposition_2.thumb.JPG.6b01343f8efafb291ab0a2b8599a059a.JPG

 

Starting to lose confidence in the integrity of the IG platform.

Link to comment

Hi there

Not sure about your GS feature on FX but I have complained to IG officially the other day about their rules about GS on automated systems that run, in my case thats Pro-Order. I had been running this last year for 8 months till October. Basically when they changed their 'Minimum stop distance requirements (MSDR)' your automated system would close down if it did have a stop that was less than their MSDR rule - all good there and understood.  BUT I ran that same strategy last week on a Friday and placed a GS on the pro-order by ticking the box. When I looked at my screen, shockingly, my 'Guaranteed Stop (GS)' was a whopping over 1000 points away! As they had a rule at that time that the MSDR was 10% of the DAX / GER30. I quickly closed my automated system down as there is no way at £10 pp (or whatever value to be frank) that I am going to take that kind of massive £10,000 risk on a small trade with a TP of <30 points. 

I immediately emailed them - as usual after 1 week no response. I called them on Saturday 18th April. Apparently they have changed the rules ! There is no update for you the trader, no email, no text no change in their T & C's. Nothing. Basically according to an IG rep, the rule is that if you have an automated system and place a stop thats "GUARANTEED" - It does not matter, they apply their own stop which COMPLETELY over-rides your one. You get NO warning of this and are apparently - shockingly - liable financially if this stop gets hit. According to the IG rep, this change was a 'long time ago' - nonsense I told him as up to October 2019 this was not happening. Also according to him this rule change was bcos some people had opened positions and when there was a change in the MSDR rule their positions were closed out and IG had to refund some of them. So IG's solution to this : Just ignore the clients algorithmic rules totally and apply a stop the trader is not aware of and if the trader gets caught out, tough. When I explained to IG that I run an algo BCOS there are rules that must be obeyed and if they are not that algo must be closed down, I just got the 'I will talk to someone and let you know'. He also told me that no one else had complained ! Really I said, you mean no ones complained about you not abiding by a 'GS' and being liable for thousands with NO warning...let see. 

The whole situation running an algo now with IG is VERY worrying to say the least, and there does not seem to be any process in place to warn you of this - for example last Friday I only by chance noticed this. With an Algo running the idea is you are not mean't to be 'tied to your screen'. Let see their official response. 

Oscar / UK 

 

Link to comment

I dont use guaranteed stops in proorder so i dont know how it works now, but i did try it in the beginning and the system did stop when ever the system tried to move the stop because a guaranteed stop cant be moved

If you have a condition to "sell at stop" the standard stop moves to that level and if its a guaranteed stop the system would stop (thats how it worked in the beginning)

Maybe they (IG) have changed it so the guranteed stop becomes a standard stop when the system tries to move it?

If so they should have informed us about that (i have missed it)?

If using "sell at market"  instead of "sell at stop" in the code the guaranteed stop should work? (and no coded  trailing stop that tries to move the stoplevel)

Link to comment

"Maybe they (IG) have changed it so the guranteed stop becomes a standard stop when the system tries to move it?"

If so, maybe some kind of warning that pops up when try to start a system in proorder that this system using code not compatible with a guaranteed stop (or something)

Link to comment
On 20/04/2020 at 06:30, OSCARDAX said:

Hi there

Not sure about your GS feature on FX but I have complained to IG officially the other day about their rules about GS on automated systems that run, in my case thats Pro-Order. I had been running this last year for 8 months till October. Basically when they changed their 'Minimum stop distance requirements (MSDR)' your automated system would close down if it did have a stop that was less than their MSDR rule - all good there and understood.  BUT I ran that same strategy last week on a Friday and placed a GS on the pro-order by ticking the box. When I looked at my screen, shockingly, my 'Guaranteed Stop (GS)' was a whopping over 1000 points away! As they had a rule at that time that the MSDR was 10% of the DAX / GER30. I quickly closed my automated system down as there is no way at £10 pp (or whatever value to be frank) that I am going to take that kind of massive £10,000 risk on a small trade with a TP of <30 points. 

I immediately emailed them - as usual after 1 week no response. I called them on Saturday 18th April. Apparently they have changed the rules ! There is no update for you the trader, no email, no text no change in their T & C's. Nothing. Basically according to an IG rep, the rule is that if you have an automated system and place a stop thats "GUARANTEED" - It does not matter, they apply their own stop which COMPLETELY over-rides your one. You get NO warning of this and are apparently - shockingly - liable financially if this stop gets hit. According to the IG rep, this change was a 'long time ago' - nonsense I told him as up to October 2019 this was not happening. Also according to him this rule change was bcos some people had opened positions and when there was a change in the MSDR rule their positions were closed out and IG had to refund some of them. So IG's solution to this : Just ignore the clients algorithmic rules totally and apply a stop the trader is not aware of and if the trader gets caught out, tough. When I explained to IG that I run an algo BCOS there are rules that must be obeyed and if they are not that algo must be closed down, I just got the 'I will talk to someone and let you know'. He also told me that no one else had complained ! Really I said, you mean no ones complained about you not abiding by a 'GS' and being liable for thousands with NO warning...let see. 

The whole situation running an algo now with IG is VERY worrying to say the least, and there does not seem to be any process in place to warn you of this - for example last Friday I only by chance noticed this. With an Algo running the idea is you are not mean't to be 'tied to your screen'. Let see their official response. 

Oscar / UK 

 

That's what I was trying to do too - I'm glad I'm not alone. That said, dang that is an insane min. stop distance for the DAX. But I noticed that quite a bit on especially on trade with noticeably lesser volatility, like the CHF/JPY, MSDR is I believe 233 bps, which makes my TP of 30 - 50 pts always a risk/profit 4:1 most of the time. Insane margins.

It is not very algo friendly if the Guaranteed Stop isn't exactly Guaranteed even after their 3 bps premium - I mean my experience was way too extreme.

 

On 20/04/2020 at 16:55, Kodiak said:

I dont use guaranteed stops in proorder so i dont know how it works now, but i did try it in the beginning and the system did stop when ever the system tried to move the stop because a guaranteed stop cant be moved

If you have a condition to "sell at stop" the standard stop moves to that level and if its a guaranteed stop the system would stop (thats how it worked in the beginning)

Maybe they (IG) have changed it so the guranteed stop becomes a standard stop when the system tries to move it?

If so they should have informed us about that (i have missed it)?

If using "sell at market"  instead of "sell at stop" in the code the guaranteed stop should work? (and no coded  trailing stop that tries to move the stoplevel)

Thanks for sharing. "...when ever the system tried to move the stop because a guaranteed stop cant be moved..."

I think you might have a clue there - as in it has to do with some system bug. I played with it yesterday and true enough there was some bizarre Opening and closing of positions from my deliberate attempt at placing a deal and order consecutively. 

My past activity shows a deliberate Limit order placement followed by a deal open, however the open and close of the Order by the system was not captured neither was the closure of the 2nd deal.

200420_CHFJPY_Activity.thumb.JPG.14adcc9d2864e799c9a6d97b696619c0.JPG

The Guaranteed level 111.395 is quite clear with stop 250 bps away, yet - somehow the opening was at 111.745, 111.745 respectively.

Below you can see that somehow, on the same day 20 Apr '20, the DEAL was made at 40 over bps away.

200420_CHFJPY_Transactions.thumb.JPG.f095c105b19126dd1ef612f31bfd04f9.JPG

 

So maybe, the System could've just simply executed the order at the current market level (mistaking for the Opening price) and just closed off immediately because having checked back the actual Guaranteed Limit order level, realised it does not tally and closed off the anomaly.

AND that testing just costed me some SGD70 - I just don't get it.

 

- BG / S'pore

Link to comment

Yes all this is wholly unacceptable, They IG, do not seem to have any clearly defined rules in place. For example after I placed a GS which I normally do not and saw that it was placed, by IG over a 1000 points away on the GER30 last week and as I have said they say they've changed 'the rules'. then last week my PRO REAL CODE was stopped bcos it did not meet their "min. stop distance rule"  conditions - like it always did, so I get that. So sometimes they implement the old system of stopping your strategy which is correct and now they say they just implement THEIR stop level ! 

I am currently awaiting their official response but at the moment literally you cannot leave positions open the weekend or even weekday night,. as if your trade got triggered and went against you - without you knowing - your stop can be up to a 1000 points away. You wake up the next morning and you are at a loss of 1000's ££. Shocking.

Link to comment

Hi

I think I may have a similar issue.

I had a currency trade open (BUY) AUS/USD and noted that after while the trend that began was a sell off. I proceeded to then open another trade to "SELL". When I did that it closed the buy trade at a loss.

Can someone maybe explain this that has had this happen before?

Thanks

Dean

Link to comment
On 22/04/2020 at 01:22, OSCARDAX said:

Yes all this is wholly unacceptable, They IG, do not seem to have any clearly defined rules in place. For example after I placed a GS which I normally do not and saw that it was placed, by IG over a 1000 points away on the GER30 last week and as I have said they say they've changed 'the rules'. then last week my PRO REAL CODE was stopped bcos it did not meet their "min. stop distance rule"  conditions - like it always did, so I get that. So sometimes they implement the old system of stopping your strategy which is correct and now they say they just implement THEIR stop level ! 

I am currently awaiting their official response but at the moment literally you cannot leave positions open the weekend or even weekday night,. as if your trade got triggered and went against you - without you knowing - your stop can be up to a 1000 points away. You wake up the next morning and you are at a loss of 1000's ££. Shocking.

I should probably write in to pressure their response too. I suspect its something to do with the Guaranteed Stop system, the normal Stop-loss / Limit seems to play according to at least  the slippage rules.

My conspiracy-theory is that IG probably wants us to use their new K.O. order system. But I'm averse to that - if your risk is your margin, I have an inkling the propensity to lose that margin is much higher and I'm not even sure how to hedge that.

 

On 22/04/2020 at 14:41, DeanM said:

Hi

I think I may have a similar issue.

I had a currency trade open (BUY) AUS/USD and noted that after while the trend that began was a sell off. I proceeded to then open another trade to "SELL". When I did that it closed the buy trade at a loss.

Can someone maybe explain this that has had this happen before?

Thanks

Dean

Yes, similar thing happened to me on 8 Apr '20, you can check out my previous post -

https://community.ig.com/forums/topic/9480-disappearing-audsgd-order/

In my experience, the valid hedge G.S. order had mysteriously disappeared, when the open position hit the TL mark.

Perhaps you should check your transaction vs your activity history.

 

I think the moral of the story here seems to keep as little positions open as possible, and if you do, you have to be extra cautious in placing a subsequent ORDER or DEAL in any market you have an existing open position on.

This can't possibly be good if you want to test a new strat or trying to properly develop an algo for this.

 

BG / S'pore

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 22/04/2020 at 07:41, DeanM said:

Hi

I think I may have a similar issue.

I had a currency trade open (BUY) AUS/USD and noted that after while the trend that began was a sell off. I proceeded to then open another trade to "SELL". When I did that it closed the buy trade at a loss.

Can someone maybe explain this that has had this happen before?

Thanks

Dean

To come out of a BUY position you have to SELL, so when you opened the SELL position (same amount) it automatically closed out your BUY position - and vice versa. You cant hedge on the same FX. You'll need another platform to do this on or another ETF to hedge against.

Link to comment
On 22/04/2020 at 07:41, DeanM said:

Hi

I think I may have a similar issue.

I had a currency trade open (BUY) AUS/USD and noted that after while the trend that began was a sell off. I proceeded to then open another trade to "SELL". When I did that it closed the buy trade at a loss.

Can someone maybe explain this that has had this happen before?

Thanks

Dean

 

12 minutes ago, barry7376 said:

To come out of a BUY position you have to SELL, so when you opened the SELL position (same amount) it automatically closed out your BUY position - and vice versa. You cant hedge on the same FX. You'll need another platform to do this on or another ETF to hedge against.

Hi, if on the deal/order ticket you have selected 'Net off' the platform will net off your trades and leave open just the portion (if any) of the remaining trade. If you wan't to have 2 trades running in the opposite directions (hedging mode) you need to select 'Force Open' on the deal ticket.

see pic.

image.thumb.png.09c7a4f3c7e76a9019d68644d19d9eb3.png

  • Like 3
Link to comment
15 hours ago, Caseynotes said:

 

Hi, if on the deal/order ticket you have selected 'Net off' the platform will net off your trades and leave open just the portion (if any) of the remaining trade. If you wan't to have 2 trades running in the opposite directions (hedging mode) you need to select 'Force Open' on the deal ticket.

 

 

Ah, so that could be why it the positions closed or orders simply vanished. In that case, I think the action and transaction history should track these system Net-off or Force open orders / deals as well - do you know if this is recorded or can be shown as well?

16 hours ago, barry7376 said:

To come out of a BUY position you have to SELL, so when you opened the SELL position (same amount) it automatically closed out your BUY position - and vice versa. You cant hedge on the same FX. You'll need another platform to do this on or another ETF to hedge against.

I do remember having some opposite running trade positions running before on the same FX market - its just that some of the pair markets are quite iffy on the GS orders.

 

I still don't get why my original issue occurred - I had no further activity apart from increasing my stop-loss margin (taking more risk) and system suddenly decided to terminate the position. Even if there was an adjustment to the GS min. I think it was way too much to suddenly cut-off existing positions.

But I still think the most bizarre occurrence was when GS. limit orders opened at the current price levels 40bps away from the indicated price levels and then immediately debugged, closing it off. Some kind of reverse-slippage.

Link to comment

Hi,

recently I had the same problem.

I had a long position on a BRK.B, decide to SELL for hedging off but 'Net Off' was selected and with following parameters

Size 150

Level 17450

Stop 17650

Limit 17050

what happen was the price gap up, open high 17495 but close at 17449... didn't hit my stop loss. Partial position was deduct from my long position and had to pay for the lose trade as well... I didn't understand why with all parameters set, and yet the order did not execute as set parameters...

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • General Statistics

    • Total Topics
      21,176
    • Total Posts
      90,698
    • Total Members
      41,283
    • Most Online
      7,522
      10/06/21 10:53

    Newest Member
    CFDBandit
    Joined 29/01/23 03:20
  • Posts

    • Capital, win loss ratio. If you have a trading edge and you can consistently win 50% of your trades, so your winning 5 trades out of 10. So if your risking 1% of your capital per trade, out of your 10 trades 5 would be losers, so that’s 5% loss and realistically out of the 5 winning trades, some would make small profits, some break even and 1, 2 or 3 could run nicely IF you can let your profits run, basically your making money out of 2 trades out of the 10 trades (80/20 Rule Pareto principle) So a $20,000 acct risking 1% is $200 per trade, this will keep the trader with his trade risk based on being able to win 50% of his trades. A long term trend trader can win with 30% wining trade. Basically you need to know your numbers. Rgds Pete
    • Investing in stocks can be a great way to grow your wealth over time. However, there are different approaches that investors can take when choosing which stocks to buy. Two of the most popular approaches are growth investing and value investing. Growth Investing Growth investing is an investment strategy that focuses on buying stocks of companies that are expected to grow at a faster rate than the overall market. These companies are often in industries that are growing quickly, such as technology or healthcare. Investors who use this approach believe that these companies will be able to generate higher profits in the future, which will lead to higher stock prices. One of the main advantages of growth investing is that it can potentially provide higher returns than the overall market. However, it is also riskier than other investment strategies, as these companies often have higher valuations and more volatile stock prices. Value Investing Value investing is an investment strategy that focuses on buying stocks of companies that are undervalued by the market. These companies may be in industries that are out of favour or have recently experienced challenges, but they have strong fundamentals and a history of profitability. Investors who use this approach believe that these companies are undervalued and that their true value will be recognized in the future, leading to higher stock prices. One of the main advantages of value investing is that it can potentially provide lower risk than growth investing. However, it may also provide lower returns in the long run, as these companies may not have the same growth potential as companies in the growth investing category. Comparing Growth and Value Investing Growth and value investing are two different approaches to stock investing, each with its own advantages and disadvantages. Growth investing can potentially provide higher returns but is riskier, while value investing can provide lower risk but potentially lower returns. An investor may choose one approach or a combination of both. A portfolio that contains a mix of growth and value stocks can provide a balance of potential returns and risk. Conclusion Both growth investing and value investing can be effective ways to invest in stocks. The key is to understand the potential risks and rewards of each approach and to choose the one that aligns with your investment goals and risk tolerance. Analyst Peter Mathers TradingLounge™ 
    • I am a beginner, and I must say, there are a lot of rules to the trading game that one must abide by if they want to be successful.   Here, the writer mentions several basic rules for day vs swing trading.  However, I find that often times, the reasoning for these rules is not as  obvious for a beginner as it may be for an expert.   The 'why' factor if I may. For example, why must you have a large capital to trade with as a day trader? Because your positions must be large so that a small change in price will be augmented and turned into a large profit. Also, with such high risk, the margin will be specially high, given the trader is taking up large positions at a time.  Without a large amount of capital, positions may be forced to close due to funds being below margin requirements.  When this happens, you can expect to lose tons of cash, fast.  I learned the hard way. All the best, David Franco      
×
×
  • Create New...