|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
For ES, my BMI cable collected only 95,665 ticks due to problems
with CSPAN in San Francisco, but how about this:
my TS6 shows 97,799 ticks which seems to be more than
reported by CME. Expect next from TRAD: "we give you even more ticks
than you can get from the exchange".
Jan Philipp
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hango Winspy" <hwinva@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <jdo1@xxxxxxxxx>; <Omega-List@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2002 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: Tick Reliability
> I have TS4 (started on ver 3) with BMI cable data subscription for 7 plus
> years. My data collection is almost perfect as follows:
>
> My server CME # of ticks Error
> Date collection records missed Rate
>
> 7/22 140,495 140,552 57 .041%
> 7/23 145,354 145,447 93 .064%
> 7/24 151,766 151,992 226 .149%
> 7/25 137,392 137,523 131 .095%
> 7/26 97,290 97,318 28 .029%
>
> Besides Wednesday, I missed only less than one tenth of one percent.
>
> Hango
>
>
> >From: "jdfo" <jdo1@xxxxxxxxx>
> >To: "Omega List" <Omega-List@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >Subject: Tick Reliability
> >Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2002 09:00:40 -0400
> >
> >I use a cable modem, TradeStation 2000i and e-signal. This past week, I
> >received the following ticks on the E-mini, Sept contract:
> >
> > Mon 7/22 139,304
> > Tue 7/23 141,241
> > Wed 7/24 149,970
> > Thu 7/25 136,459
> > Fri 7/26 91,308
> >
> > I was wondering if anyone would care to compare their results to
> >determine the reliability of cable modems and e-signal?
> > I know that retrieving this same data from Omega's HistoryBank.com
> >results in an 40 to 50% error rate; HistoryBank loses almost one-half of
> >the ticks, making this resource totally useless.
> > Thanks in advance for any replies.
> >
> > John O
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
|