4 ms·

I'm curious what folk's thoughts are on these two platforms: Interactive brokers offers low fee access to their platform (https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en

I'm curious what folk's thoughts are on these two platforms: Interactive brokers offers low fee access to their platform (https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=13869 https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/index.php?f=13869) Quantopian (www.quantopian.com) gives you the ability to trade through robinhood with long trades at 0 commission. There has been some skepticism in the Q forums on how well robinhood's execution is (possibly the effect of a "you get what you pay for"-attitude). Trading real capital with algorithms is more difficult than it sounds. Mentally if you're algorithm is doing stock selection as well as trade execution, you no longer understand what you own. During a period of extended drawdown, you have to be mentally tough enough to believe that your algorithm has what it takes to dig itself out. In a sense, it is like the start-up game. You have to believe you're doing something well enough that in the end you'll be right (and not bankrupt).

seagreen 10y ago
My thoughts are that if you use either platform for anything other than entertainment you're a fool. Seriously, here's your competition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies How deluded do you have to be to think you have an edge over that?
- asdkjasdkj 10y ago
  This level of defeatism is the exact reason I got into the markets algo trading. People like you stay out. More to the point, just because a genius mathematician and code breaker started a hedge fund it doesn't at all push out any of the little guys. The market is so large he can't possibly be trading all instruments at once, and "scaling" is a problem for huge hedge funds. Especially ones that have to answer to their shareholders. Even though this is a huge fund, it is highly inflexible. What you're saying is akin to "Google already does email and they're loaded with geniuses, what makes you think you have an edge over that?"
  - Fomite 10y ago
    In fairness, if someone told me they were going to make a killing on free webmail supported by ads and data mining, I think "How on earth do you intend to complete with Google?" would be a perfectly legitimate question.
    - Enzolangellotti 10y ago
      In fairness, by that logic nothing would ever get done. Microsoft? You're never going to win over IBM. Xerox? You'll always be ancillary to Kodak. GM? Ford is already there. The Fugger's Banking company? Good luck against the Venetians and the Florentines. Same old story. At the end of the day, you either try something new or you don't.
      - ori_b 10y ago
        > In fairness, by that logic nothing would ever get done. Or it will get done by people who have thought long and hard about how they are going to compete with the giants, rather than someone naïve sap. The fact that the question is being asked does not imply that there are no good answers to it, but it is unlikely that someone who hasn't spent time considering how to improve on the incumbents is going to beat them.
        Enzolangellotti 10y ago
        Indeed, but nobody (I certainly wasn't) was advocating to not do your homework and evaluate your risk. Sometimes, however, things just happen, for example James Simons stumbled upon the industry by chance. How many companies were motivated by killer instinct? Did Gates want to kill IBM? Did Xerox plan to kill Kodak (they didn't but they serendipitously started a revolution)?
      - deleted 10y ago
        [deleted]
      - Fomite 10y ago
        Only if they don't have a good answer to the question.
- gnaritas 10y ago
  > Seriously, here's your competition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies Incorrect for the reasons pointed out above, they're trading size, you're likely not, it's a completely different game for them in a completely different field due to their liquidity needs. They are not your competition.
- nl 10y ago
  This isn't true. There are a non-zero number of traders who use IB and post positive returns. For example Taaffeite Capital Management (who gained some publicity for good returns on Brexit) are a < $10mm fund who use IB[1]. Sure, bigger funds have better market access, and it will always be impossible to implement a high frequency trading approach. But these platforms are about as good as a small player can get. [1] http://www.afr.com/personal-finance/shares/artificial-intelligence-yields-huge-returns-from-brexit-20160705-gpza32 http://www.afr.com/personal-finance/shares/artificial-intell...
  - seagreen 10y ago
    Dr. Lun has a PhD from MIT and is doing original AI research. If that's your profile then do what you want=)
    - akg_67 10y ago
      Don't get impressed by credentials and buzzwords. A lot of people had and are having success without credentials. The investing, trading domain is large enough to accommodate different approaches and wide variety of skill set. It is not the domain of a few chosen or privileged ones.
    - nl 10y ago
      There are plenty of MIT PhDs very successfully losing money. I think this goes directly to the "if you use these platforms you are a fool" comment. It seems to me that some people who aren't fools use the platforms, and some who are, don't. Also, this is HN. Pretty sure there is more than one MIT PhD reading this, and I know there is more than one doing original AI research. Bring this comment to mind: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/28911860225 https://twitter.com/paulg/status/28911860225 (exact comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079)
      - seagreen 10y ago
        "if you use these platforms you are a fool" Hey, that's not fair, you're arguing against half my point! I said if you use these platforms _and don't have a reason to think you've got an advantage_ you shouldn't be doing so. Lun and his peers are an exception to this. If you want to make a second argument and say he shouldn't be trading go ahead (and I'll try to back you up), but my original point was about the 99.9% who aren't Lun and are clearly just fish.
Blackthorn 10y ago
I use Interactive Brokers. They're probably the best retail brokerage out there. They're cheap -- the best rates on commissions and by far the best rates for margin. And they have a reasonably well-documented and supported API which you can write your programs against. The API is actually pretty much industry-standard so if you're interested in a third-party program, they probably support it. If there's any downside, it's their data. You can't get that much of it historically (1 year max on the minute bars, far less on the second bars, and it takes forever to download it because of the throttling). It's also not...I'm going to say correct...historically. I mean, it is a correct record of what trades happened when. But it includes trades that you won't see when they happen, making it less useful if you're looking for a stream of events as they are happening. Also compared to a broker like Lightspeed (who I haven't tried) their data is expensive. The software is a big mess, but it's usable. It's always in this weird state where it's 50-75% of the way to being completely awesome, but there's just a few things missing that stop it from being so. Also if I have one nitpicky complaint it's that I can't direct route complex options orders.
- lintiness 10y ago
  use iqfeed or quandl for data (i use iqfeed for quotes as well).
  - Blackthorn 10y ago
    Sure but that's a big monthly expense.

seagreen 10y ago

My thoughts are that if you use either platform for anything other than entertainment you're a fool. Seriously, here's your competition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies How deluded do you have to be to think you have an edge over that?

asdkjasdkj 10y ago
This level of defeatism is the exact reason I got into the markets algo trading. People like you stay out. More to the point, just because a genius mathematician and code breaker started a hedge fund it doesn't at all push out any of the little guys. The market is so large he can't possibly be trading all instruments at once, and "scaling" is a problem for huge hedge funds. Especially ones that have to answer to their shareholders. Even though this is a huge fund, it is highly inflexible. What you're saying is akin to "Google already does email and they're loaded with geniuses, what makes you think you have an edge over that?"
- Fomite 10y ago
  In fairness, if someone told me they were going to make a killing on free webmail supported by ads and data mining, I think "How on earth do you intend to complete with Google?" would be a perfectly legitimate question.
  - Enzolangellotti 10y ago
    In fairness, by that logic nothing would ever get done. Microsoft? You're never going to win over IBM. Xerox? You'll always be ancillary to Kodak. GM? Ford is already there. The Fugger's Banking company? Good luck against the Venetians and the Florentines. Same old story. At the end of the day, you either try something new or you don't.
    - ori_b 10y ago
      > In fairness, by that logic nothing would ever get done. Or it will get done by people who have thought long and hard about how they are going to compete with the giants, rather than someone naïve sap. The fact that the question is being asked does not imply that there are no good answers to it, but it is unlikely that someone who hasn't spent time considering how to improve on the incumbents is going to beat them.
      - Enzolangellotti 10y ago
        Indeed, but nobody (I certainly wasn't) was advocating to not do your homework and evaluate your risk. Sometimes, however, things just happen, for example James Simons stumbled upon the industry by chance. How many companies were motivated by killer instinct? Did Gates want to kill IBM? Did Xerox plan to kill Kodak (they didn't but they serendipitously started a revolution)?
    - deleted 10y ago
      [deleted]
    - Fomite 10y ago
      Only if they don't have a good answer to the question.
gnaritas 10y ago
> Seriously, here's your competition: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance_Technologies Incorrect for the reasons pointed out above, they're trading size, you're likely not, it's a completely different game for them in a completely different field due to their liquidity needs. They are not your competition.
nl 10y ago
This isn't true. There are a non-zero number of traders who use IB and post positive returns. For example Taaffeite Capital Management (who gained some publicity for good returns on Brexit) are a < $10mm fund who use IB[1]. Sure, bigger funds have better market access, and it will always be impossible to implement a high frequency trading approach. But these platforms are about as good as a small player can get. [1] http://www.afr.com/personal-finance/shares/artificial-intelligence-yields-huge-returns-from-brexit-20160705-gpza32 http://www.afr.com/personal-finance/shares/artificial-intell...
- seagreen 10y ago
  Dr. Lun has a PhD from MIT and is doing original AI research. If that's your profile then do what you want=)
  - akg_67 10y ago
    Don't get impressed by credentials and buzzwords. A lot of people had and are having success without credentials. The investing, trading domain is large enough to accommodate different approaches and wide variety of skill set. It is not the domain of a few chosen or privileged ones.
  - nl 10y ago
    There are plenty of MIT PhDs very successfully losing money. I think this goes directly to the "if you use these platforms you are a fool" comment. It seems to me that some people who aren't fools use the platforms, and some who are, don't. Also, this is HN. Pretty sure there is more than one MIT PhD reading this, and I know there is more than one doing original AI research. Bring this comment to mind: https://twitter.com/paulg/status/28911860225 https://twitter.com/paulg/status/28911860225 (exact comment here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35079)
    - seagreen 10y ago
      "if you use these platforms you are a fool" Hey, that's not fair, you're arguing against half my point! I said if you use these platforms _and don't have a reason to think you've got an advantage_ you shouldn't be doing so. Lun and his peers are an exception to this. If you want to make a second argument and say he shouldn't be trading go ahead (and I'll try to back you up), but my original point was about the 99.9% who aren't Lun and are clearly just fish.

Blackthorn 10y ago

I use Interactive Brokers. They're probably the best retail brokerage out there. They're cheap -- the best rates on commissions and by far the best rates for margin. And they have a reasonably well-documented and supported API which you can write your programs against. The API is actually pretty much industry-standard so if you're interested in a third-party program, they probably support it. If there's any downside, it's their data. You can't get that much of it historically (1 year max on the minute bars, far less on the second bars, and it takes forever to download it because of the throttling). It's also not...I'm going to say correct...historically. I mean, it is a correct record of what trades happened when. But it includes trades that you won't see when they happen, making it less useful if you're looking for a stream of events as they are happening. Also compared to a broker like Lightspeed (who I haven't tried) their data is expensive. The software is a big mess, but it's usable. It's always in this weird state where it's 50-75% of the way to being completely awesome, but there's just a few things missing that stop it from being so. Also if I have one nitpicky complaint it's that I can't direct route complex options orders.

lintiness 10y ago
use iqfeed or quandl for data (i use iqfeed for quotes as well).
- Blackthorn 10y ago
  Sure but that's a big monthly expense.