I am on LMAX using Multicharts , great set up for me, all my code is in easy language. Has any one ever had a bridge from MC to MT4 coded up ? Moving my systems over to MT4 is too hard and expensive .
I had the same problem as you. I had to convert all my code to mql4. It supposed that darwinex will use CQG in the near future, so you will be able to use Multicharts. Hope it helps.
There is an italian software : Widetrader
Unfortunatelly I cannot find info in english, you have to privately contact them.
Thank you for your suggestions, yes CQG is futures I am sure, forex on MC is a bit harder to get. There are 3 other platforms Trade Station, Ninja Trader and Muticharts, all needing a connection to Darwinex. I use renko and custom charts that cannot be converted to MT 4 without major plugins and drama. IT is was it is
According to what I understood CQG will be the platform for the FUTURES, but not for the forex that would remain exclusively available on MT4?
I was told that the first step will be to offer futures on CQG, and on further steps Darwinex will try to implement forex on CGQ if possible.
The last official comunication I´ve found from a Darwinex team about this topic is in the following link.
Would be nice to have an official update about this topic.
The fact that Darwinex only offers MT4 instead of NinjaTrader 8 / Multichart 10 / SierraChart is the only single serious reason I do not use Darwinex yet and I know there are plenty of potential customers in this case. So I stick to the likes of LMAX or even FXCM. How sad… Very sad. I really could not care less about Reloaded until I don’t have better trading tools so that my trading routine does not become something LESS instead of more (because my core activity is trading before everything else that adds up). I am very much sorry about this situation…
@juancolonbo @Ignacio please consider to unplug us (for those Who want) from Saxo Prime and PrimeXM and consider a simple CFD-Forex connection from LMAX Pro with their regular login details and/or their API (both C# and FIX)
MultiCharts and SierraChart would work right of the box with standard (non-MT4) credentials from LMAX and there is an affordable bridge for NinjaTrader available.
So some of us can finally make the move…
Having those platforms mentionned for futures next is not targeting the same audience and not an alternative to addressing the need for something better on CFD-Forex outside of MT4 or even cTrader
This comes from the biggest trading forum in the world
From looking at the viewers and posts counts browsing threads, you can check the platforms’ popularity…
Some reaction is needed !
I do partially agree. More connectivity would be great. I think a FIX connection is available, though?
However, I also think that among forex traders MT4 is still the most used platform (most used doesn’t mean best )
I think the screenshot you posted is from futures.io? Not sure I would agree that it’s the “biggest trading forum in the world” as it has <100k members whereas babypips has >300k and forexfactory >400k.
Also, the name futures.io suggests that it is mainly aiming at trading futures and MT4 is clearly not targeting futures traders so the numbers are naturally skewed towards other platforms.
By the way, there is no better time that now to address this issue since you are now teaming up with pro partners like Krechendo.
Tarek is working on platforms like X-Trader or CQG trader sometimes at $1000 cost a month. So will he teach his students DOM scalping (1min to 3min trades) and then direct them on Dwx to MT4 which has no DOM and no futures ? Until it evolves, what a “soupe à la grimace” it will be… Also not everyone coming out of such school will have the financial means or logic to start on futures right away.
The in between pro and retail world which sums up into centrally cleared CFD-forex and better platforms (with DOM and much more) should really not be missed
FIX connectivity from PrimeXM at $500 a month is not financially viable for most of the audience it targets, that is to say sometimes strategies accounts at $1000, $100 or even $10 you know the story
Allright, let’s call futures.io (which was renamed not so long ago) the largest futures oriented fòrum un the world
I encounter mostly indices traders which are really lacking (in presence) at the moment at Darwinex. Usually this crowd in the past have had a simple, or more, experience with futures although they trade CFDs. They use either the brokers’ own web platform or the futures platforms MT/NT/SC/ProRealTime and express on average higher needs than the baby crowd of forex traders (teasing you). Usually they are also more discretionnary oriented than mechanical, its a fact
Anyway I know dozens of CFD traders for having been a moderator on a couple of sites in France and having run an own site. From my experience, about 5% are using or enjoying MT4. They won’t exchange anything for MT4 and actually smile or laugh if you bring anything named MetaQuote which has often a bad reputation (virtual dealer, latency, hedging only, old school interface lacking) and just because they have known better !
Finally, I was an IB for LMAX, zero client for MT4…for a reason ! With the technology behind LMAX, linking it to MT4 is like the marriage of a pig and a fish. It is not meant to go hand in hand
If Darwinex wants to seek excellence, then the choice of MT4 is a joke. Personally, I will wait forever if needed as long as Dwx is MT4 only, this is my main criteria
No need to feel sorry. I am with you. Metatrader is in parts terrible, however, it has a massive userbase because it is offered by almost every broker, has an excellent documentation and most importantly a plethora of freely available code and indicators. That’s why traders usually start with MT4 and if they survive and evolve, they begin to look for more advanced platforms.
As far as I know, Darwinex will introduce CQG with their coming futures offering. I agree that this would be a great addition and will possibly lead to a more diversified offering of Darwins.
For Darwinex the decision to start off with Metatrader is totally natural and smart in my opinion. Darwinex used to be Tradeslide and was at first only offering trade analysis for traders. Once they became their own brokerage they had to target the biggest user base first and if we like it or not that is MT4 users.
Now it’s time to conquer new territories with new “weapons”
Yes it was a great start, very much forex and retail oriented to say the least.
Pro traders and rich players (not that many?) will be thrilled to welcome futures.
Let’s also take care of the in-between. It represents some interesting volume for Darwinex
PS: as you may know, we have a french Slack channel about Darwinex. I’d say a good third of the active members read us everyday or often yet are not clients of Darwinex. They are most of them clients of IG/ProRealTime (which is average) on indices. Scratch your head ? They are not tempted ! Or “only tempted”, not enough convinced. MT4 as the only choice plays a big role in this
Muticharts is a great platform.
Prorealtime… I have a friend that is trying to do some algo trading with it…
I am looking forward to investing $ 200.-- on a Darwin that trades the fDax at 25 euros per point.
But without being pessimistic, I doubt that I can do it in 2017.
I say that our good old forex on our good old MT4 is not ready to be trampled by hordes of thousands of Futures traders
Futures are for the future.
Hopefully the ‘reloaded’ update will appear in the near future … in less than a week on the 39th floor of a building in London ?
Most traders start on MT4, and yes do move onto some paid for platform later if they survive. Algo trader is growing exponentially, most professional algo traders , do not use MT4 . Simple as that, When I say algo , not some code entering and exiting on minute based charts, I mean stuff that is not even out in the public domain, custom developed charts. This code does not trade well on MT4, is run by traders on other platforms, more good traders are waiting, but as time goes by they of course move on .
Do not formalize on my previous post that was a little teasing.
I know your situation well, I participated in a project where my partner had developed an algorithm on MultiCharts.
The problem for the broker is the amortization of investment in the development of various connectors for different platforms.
I think Juan’s response to C-Trader would also be valid for MultiCharts.
Admitting that the cost of developing a connector is 25,000 euros, and that 2 people would be interested in connecting to Darwinex with MultiCharts, the motivation to put the project to the top of the todo list is naturally low.
The demand for alternative platforms is too diverse.
I am not a specialist, but according to my information, the FIX standard is by far not a universal connector that solves all problems. In general, you need a .api connector in parallel.
If I understood correctly, CQG would be a kind of hub allowing the connection of several platforms.
In the end it is certain that a small execution bridge from MultiCharts to MT4 would be the most pragmatic solution. After all, it would only be a special version of a trades copier.
I know so few people outside an interest on forex who start on MT4 or even discuss it. The big names of the CFD industry (IG, GAIN Capital, FXCM, CMC, etc) all have standards that do not put MT4 up front but proprietary solutions first hand, then only third party softwares, MT4, NinjaTrader, MultiCharts, in that order. When numerous possibilities compete, there are clear winners in online debates. At futures.io I rarely see topics on MT4 with FXCM as opposed to NinjaTrader. eToro which is shite but popular never even bothered about MT4 and they are succesful commercially nonetheless. Back in the days, LMAX started its business with MultiCharts because it was only in par with their high standards of servicing. The truth is that most forex traders have never tried something else than MT4 in their life or barely. They seem less curious and adventurous but that has more to do with habits. Yet they don’t really know what they are missing on for lack of comparison.
FDAX is one of the highest priced / most risky indice future. Maybe we’ll see more FESX or ES, which are a lot more accessible, calmer and last, the best for scalability purposes ! along with the “financials” / interest rates (Bund, Treasury Notes, etc)
@NapoleonDynamite we’re fully aware of the concerns around MT4. We will tackle these in due course, let’s first ship re-loaded, and we then go from there. This area is high up our priority roadmap, and there will be decisions made in the coming months.
Having said that, a source of concern, and what has delayed our actioning this, is replacing one dependency (MetaQuotes) by another (MultiCharts / Ninja / TradingView) etc - especially given platform providers’ tendency to become brokers these days.
On that note, rather than focussing scarce development resources on 3rd party integrations, our most likely course of action will be (on OTC traded instruments) to release our own trading API, make it available for 3rd party developers to integrate as they see fit as a GUI, and gradually build proprietary trader assist tools based on our differential diagnostic / risk management offering.
Last, but not least, we will make the business case of getting paid for trading on MT4 more and more superior to paying for trading on PlatformX / Y / Z. I’ve seen 10 traders who make money despite MT4 for every winning trader on all those other platforms…
Imho and last but not least: let’s not forget there’s a fair amount of of “all gear, no idea” going on around. I’m sure @KlondikeFX could use 15 other platforms, but the platform is not what made him win money year in year out for 5 years…
(Hold your breath)
Your reply triggered a heated debate on our Slack channel
We are a few who cannot agree that MetaTrader 4 is a sufficient tool for discretionnary trading. Maybe it is good, but not versatile in all cases, for algo trading. It lacks some complexity …or has the wrong stuff in the the wrong place at times
I can hear the Darwinian message that we can always adapt. I have no problem to adapt on new or different stuff when they represent an evolution. Yet when it becomes to adapt for the worse, some of us will stop here. In my case, at this stage of Darwinex’s story, I am afraid it won’t make up for the change alone.
Both of us will agree that Darwinex offers the asset manager part which is very unique … however, maybe I represent a minority, but first and foremost I consider myself interested into prop trading, that is true, prop trading mostly. The rest for me is only some extra cherry that will plug into it and rocket at a later time than now.
I don’t see myself building a wall without the first brick of best trading conditions, depending on the many different situations. I will actually deploy a robot on MT4, because I believe it fits. But for my main core discretionnary duty, MT4 does not fit.
I do regret that I get a truncated LMAX at Darwinex. One of the use of LMAX is its transparent liquidity and open order book. I have contacted a developper to create custom iceberg Market If Touched orders for LMAX to play safe and undercover against the LMAX liquidity providers (the top of the book CFDs liquidity is tight) This will happen on SierraChart. On MT4, you cannot access the order book liquidity to make use of it. My order type would allow to take care myself of the scalability problem by slicing entries and exits even before your algos act upon, so it could in fact team up with your execution recipe and compliment it nicely. On MT4, which is a too “closed” soft or have crappy performance on many parts, forget such things !
Again, natively, from factory configuration, trivial operations are lacking : no Close All or Reverse buttons, no position centric executions which allow for simple monitoring and quick global intervention on the account.
Sometimes in my life I have breached the max limits of CFD lots carried at some shops (with lots of dilemnas arrising at market makers) and it happens that from time to time I traded heavily.
I have tried on MT4 to perform similarily and I am left with countless positions to manage indepently and plugins to work with. When I use a Close All plugin as a “fix” (sigh), MT4 closes positions one by one in a sequential order at about one each every second. This is a nightware when the market moves at a very fast pace and you want to react with precision. I usually spend a great part of my day editing orders on MT4 because of the trade centric (hedging) mode. It gets so tiring and prevents me for other more interesting activities. I actually feel than I am practicing some kind of physical sport when using MT4
Conclusion, I can hear many things but not hear that some (even if few, maybe better than average, not good - aren’t these the ones of interest ?) traders can translate under all conditions. Sorry, I really can’t accept this argument. Some compromises are too much a regression to neglect.
I am also sorry to insist on an ethical point of view, but MT4 is to the trading platforms what FXCM is to the brokers. After all, I don’t know many software companies who have deliberatly worked on solutions to cheat onto the clients. In fact, at FXCM, the MT4 accounts are amazingly rigged while the NinjaTrader and MultiCharts ones get perfect conditions (FXCM la discouraging their use!). Certainly NT and MC won’t provide a virtual dealer and more so because they have a reputation to maintain. If slippage or execution delays would happen through them it would ruin the software’s image.
Anyway, the regulators are attacking market makers bucketshops, fine : why not some of the tools which are permitting and encouraging the frauds ? That would be an idea to suggest. Half irony here !
They could definitely publish warning signs on a shortlist of blacklisted tools that have proven to fool customers historically. MT4 would have a special seat on this podium. Search for MetaTrader scam" on Google, as opposed to “NT/MC/SC scam”.
That said, I definitely know that the combo Darwinex-LMAX-MT4 is one of the most honest MT4 setup there is, client side.
Yet, MetaQuotes’ records could be too a reason enough to boycott them once and for all, especially since at Darwinex you carry a message of integrity which I know you are sincere about.
I will sum it up into the fact MT4 is one of the worst choice in the whole industry to rely on only. Which is a big contrast ATM with Darwinex which I really do consider a top notch company, if not with the best potential. Heck, the best.
More to the point now, about the perspectives
I am ready to wait forever that Darwinex evolves. Because I see continuous and amazing efforts that I am really fond of.
Therefore, I will wait for the trading API but I want to add these points upfront, because they are important and I consider myself with some experience in the field for having I 1) encouraged, bought, tested (some for MT4, total crap !) many bridges between brokers and platforms 2) co-worked the trading platform TakaScalper for IG and a NinjaTrader bridge for LMAX back then with their technical team
Some facts : it will take you some time to release the trading API, but afterwards it will also take a little time to convince third party projects to pop up.
The first thing I noticed when talking to software vendors is that they ask : “are you guys big enough so that commercially we bother working with you ?” In other words, are you FXCM, are you IG, Interactive Brokers ? An example, SierraChart is refusing to work something around Collective2 for lack of popularity (blink). Another example, it took me 2 full years of repeated trials to convince a developper to build a bridge between NinjaTrader and IG, because he still was not seeing the point (don’t kid, he was only half right). It got released yesterday
So now I know, I will need to be very patient to ever trade at Darwinex with anything API related because efforts need to add up…hence why in the first place, I really wanted you to consider a simple LMAX Pro regular gateway because all the connectivities with platforms are done and fully working ! It would have saved some hassle right away. Although…an API will be amazing to have, in the end.
Last, there are some software companies who now have high technological requirements (because they encountered many issues otherwise) and will NOT consider to work anymore with any API which runs on sub-standard protocols.
For instance, SierraChart only works either with their own protocol which they created to “level up” the industry practices, and that maybe you could use also…
…or with the FIX protocol, nothing else in between
Finally, the price cost of the APIs need to cover the whole range of your audience… this is really important that you bother. The APIs do not have to target only a niche of users.
LMAX has a costly FIX API but also a very affordable one at $30 / month using C# which is about reliable nonetheless
Conclusion : take your time, will wait endlessly. But please please please avoid mistakes : deploy either one or two segmented APIs and one of them needs to be affordable (less than $100 /month). Afterwards it is a must that one of them complies with FIX (or DTC), otherwise, it will be difficult to get neat third party developpements going on before I am old and crancky.
You got it, disappointment is the only thing I really fear. Bet it, that’s actually your fault for imagining stuff at a high level of swag
PS: I heart you and do care