Would advise those who trade with SCB to avoid using them for now or be very careful. Some of you may have noticed sluggishness in their systems or problems receiving the OTP. Or other quirks. But I suspect the problem runs deeper.
Look my stop loss trigger price. Look at executed price.
Stop loss set at 108.68.
It was triggered at 112.75
The trading range that day (monday) was between 112-114. It never came remotely close to my stop. I had another stop that day. Both was triggered automatically very close to ending bell for no reason at all.
I'm not sure how they will account for this or anyone else who lose their position in event of a rally. Their stop loss now can trigger high above the actual set price. What if it only triggers way below the set price or not at all. This calls into question the reliability of their other orders.
That is a complete, 100% failure at their end. Normally I'd say they owe you a reinstatement of your position at the original price, and a refund of the brokerage fees.
But in this case, they'll probably argue that you would have been stopped out on Tuesday afternoon anyway. You need to be a hell of a lot quicker on the draw when you're contesting a fill - like, minutes, not hours or days.
how i think it is coded is that once the stop loss is triggered, sell market order 50shares. it just so happens that someone bought up a large amount of shares with a market order, upping your average.
This is what i think happened, and no i'm not from scb
Nope - see below. The stop should never have been triggered.
Are you sure it is SCB and not a function of Yowzer's odd lot being given less priority?
I thought its normal for traders to avoid trading odd lots to avoid priority issues. Especially in the era of HFT where bid offer prices can appear and disappear in milliseconds.
Nope - even if you're trading an odd-lot, on US exchanges you're still protected by what's called the "trade-through rule". This says that your broker is not allowed to execute an order at worse than the "national best bid and offer".
The problem's not with the limit part of this order, though - that seems to have executed fine. The problem is that the stop-loss part was erroneously triggered - Apple never printed 108 on Monday, so the stop shouldn't have fired. But once it did, the 108.00 limit sell order was sent to the exchange, and it seems to have been filled at a fair price.
So the problem is in whatever software Stanchart's using to monitor its stops.
This statement I disagree. Cheap is not excuse for sloppiness. If the platform offers stop-limit order, it should be expected to function and perform as what would be expected of a stop-limit order, i.e. do it's job.
If the cost cannot cover the maintenance of this particular function, then I'd rather they remove the stop-limit function. Just provide "basic" buy/sell.
Yeah, this.
Use interactive brokers lo anyway scb is also a market maker like city index
What? No, this is completely completely wrong. Stanchart's not a "market maker", and they're not "like City Index". City index is a CFD broker; Stanchart is a stockbroker.
Is SCB that bad?
It does not have custody, corporate action, dividend commission and minimum fees right?
The big minus would be the fx charges - do they really charge 1.5% above the spot rate? If I put in $10,000 that would be $300 (both ways)
3% loss before even entering the market!
On USDSGD FX, it's 0.75% above the spot rate (ish); on non-USD crosses, it's about 1% (I think). So it's not quite that bad, but it's still a lot, especially if you're trading in AUD or GBP or EUR or something else.
Nope, you pay commissions on buys and sells.
In any case I'm pretty small time.
IB seems to charge 1% for inward remittance to fund the account as well? Not sure if it is worth it if that's the case.
Er, no - funding your IBKR account is free if you do a FAST transfer.
From SCB, the gist of it.....
Technical fault. The orders not supposed to be executed but somehow the exchange let it through. Besides my incident, there were other orders that day which were already deleted but still executed. The problem is unlikely to occur again. OUr team is on the problem. Our system is/will be going through a major upgrade but timeframe unknown. Will update again soon on status.
"The exchange let it through"? I dunno, I don't think they've explained that correctly - exchanges usually don't monitor stoploss levels, the brokers do that themselves. I think Stanchart cocked this up.
do u all know that for professionals trading in US
if u are market taker, u don't need pay commission
but if u are market maker, u pay commission
Wrong way up mate - generally market makers pay less commission, and market-takers pay more commission. (Sometimes it's the other way up, though! If you route your order to an "inverse maker-taker" exchange, you can get paid to take liquidity; yes, this is weird, but it's a thing.)