Greetings all -- Let me add my voice to those suggesting that you reconsider leaving Quotes Plus.
I am a subscriber to QP for both EOD and RealTime. I have had difficulties with QP's billing department. Gary got them straightened out for me. I am satisfied with the quality of the data. Consistency is worth a lot. Most of my research and most of my trading is done based on systems that I have developed using QP data. If I were to change to another vendor, I would begin to notice differences. That would concern me, and I would spend way too much time deciding whether I needed to be worried or not. In the end, my choices would be to redo a great deal of research, or go back to QP to resolve the differences. Thanks, Howard On Feb 16, 2008 2:01 AM, brian_z111 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul, > > I can see that you are a technician. > I wonder how that translates into your trading style? > > I don't know if you will appreciate what I have been implying. > > The data from the exchanges is not absolutely correct (although I > agree with Bill that we should treat it as if it is). > This is a 'construct of convenience' that helps us to avoid the > uncomfortable fact that objective analyze has its limits and starts > to breakdown at the edges. > > While we all say we are objective traders we aren't. > Subjectivity plays its part because it is 50% of our makeup. > After all of the analysis is down it is the feel we have for the > trade that allows us to continue in despite a bad tick or two. > > If our subjective capabilities weren't a match for our objective > capabilities we wouldn't be able to trade at all. > > brian_z > > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>, "Paul Ho" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > One problem for yahoo data for Australian stocks is that price is > only > > quoted down to 2 decimal place only. In real life, 3 decimal place > is quoted > > at the exchange. > > > > > > _____ > > > > From: [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> [mailto: > [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>] > On Behalf > > Of brian_z111 > > Sent: Friday, 15 February 2008 11:38 PM > > To: [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> > > Subject: [amibroker] Re: New EOD data feed other than Quotes Plus > > > > > > > > Ara, > > > > For the sake of sharing information - to save people wasted time: > > > > > I know many are willing to to do a lot of work in order to use > free > > >data from Yahoo or add fundamenttal info from Yahoo. > > > > It's no work at all. > > Yahoo and Yahoo current fundamentals are integrated with AmiQuote > > AB > > > > >>I have not tried it, but my impression has been that what you get > > >>is what you pay for. > > > > Yahoo data is not free - it is paid for by Yahoo (bought from > > reputable companies) from revenue from ads - it is distributed for > > free to attract users to the site who then buy things via the ads > (I > > sometimes do). > > > > >I would rather pay a reasonable fee and get a reliable product. > > > > How do we know that our data products are quality? - because the > > provider told us so? > > > > How can we check data and how many do? > > It is not so easy to check data. > > > > As I suggested to Barry the other day - we can go to Yahoo, > download > > raw, or fully adjusted, get dividend info, get split info and do > our > > own checks on Yahoo in the same way we can do that for any other > > provider. I have done one or two here and there and I haven't found > > anything alarming to me. If I did I would then work around that. > > > > What we can't get from Yahoo is event adjusted data without > dividend > > adjustment - people who want that have to get it elsewhere. > > > > Also, sadly, for longer term traders, more error is introduced into > > backtesting by using data without div adjustment than errors within > > Yahoo's data (I only say that to help people). > > > > IMO - first we should know what our trading style is, second we > > should have a strategy in mind and then third we should buy data > that > > will give us the best chance to analyze past performance of that > > strategy (in my case that means a few different types of data). > > > > As you know I could give a couple of pages more in support of > traders > > taking a more flexible and proactive attitude to their data but I > > would be better to do that at the UKB. > > > > One example: > > > > I recently developed a very promising new system on holiday - just > > before walking out the door to catch the plane I copied a complete > AB > > directory from an XP machine and dumped it on a Vista laptop > > (naughty, naughty) - I dumped all the old databases to get the size > > down and only took a copy of Jim's US Yahoo database (I wanted div > > adjusted data for EOD backtesting). > > > > I managed to get some good work done. > > > > When I got back I then carried on towards testing in intraday data > > from another provider and so far it is performing exactly as tested > > on Yahoo (only better) - I am using intraday to finesse the entries > > and exits that I couldn't finesse in EOD data. The trades average 2- > 3 > > days round trip. > > > > Also when it is ready to trade I will be totally familiar with it > > after thousands of tests etc and I will see straight away if > > something is odd when I start going to the brokers (who also has a > > different source for data). > > > > Also consider that the so-called differences in data is a bit of a > > myth. In Australia there is only one exchange - they have a > monopoly > > on the data. They do some filtering of the tick data themselves > > before releasing it to their providers so how different can it be. > > > > The only differences in data in Australia that can occur are from > a) > > extra filtering or b) event adjustments. > > > > At the prices I don't think too many here are doing to mucn of a) > and > > b) is checkable. > > > > Also, as we have seen in a recent article, bad tick data isn't the > > end of the world at the EOD level. > > > > In fact EOD traders can tolerate quite a bit of error and still win > > the day. > > > > brian_z > > > > --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> > ps.com, "Ara > > Kaloustian" <ara1@> wrote: > > > > > > Dan, I am not sure how other handle it. > > > > > > I know many are willing to to do a lot of work in order to use > free > > data from Yahoo or add fundamenttal info from Yahoo. I have not > > tried it, but my impression has been that what you get is what you > > pay for. I would rather pay a reasonable fee and get a reliable > > product. > > > > > > About TC 2000, I beleive it is slower than QP and remapping can > be > > a bunch of work and I don't care for their industry mapping either. > > > > > > QP has been fine for me with very few exceptions. > > > > > > We all meet some unacceptable service personnel from time to > > time ... I take it as part of dealing with people. It's usually OK, > > but sometime it is not. > > > > > > Sorry can't really be of much help. > > > > > > A > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > From: Dan Clark > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> > ps.com > > > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 9:15 PM > > > Subject: RE: [amibroker] New EOD data feed other than Quotes Plus > > > > > > > > > Ara, > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi. It's been a long time. > > > > > > > > > > > > I remember that I did not like the industry/sector info from > > TC2000. I can remap the data if necessary. How do others handle > > this? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > ---------- > > > > > > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> > ps.com > > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> > ps.com] On > > Behalf Of Ara Kaloustian > > > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 9:07 PM > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> > ps.com > > > Subject: Re: [amibroker] New EOD data feed other than Quotes Plus > > > > > > > > > > > > TC2000 is reliable, but they do not have fundamentals or very > > few. (at least that's what I remember from a while back). > > > > > > > > > > > > They do not have commodities and charge extra for mutual funds. > > Their data is ready earlier than QP. > > > > > > > > > > > > Their industry / sector structure is completely different tha QP. > > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > > > From: Dan Clark > > > > > > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:amibroker%40yahoogroups.com> > ps.com > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 8:55 PM > > > > > > Subject: [amibroker] New EOD data feed other than Quotes Plus > > > > > > > > > > > > I've been using Quotes Plus data for the last 2-1/2 years. > > Overall, I've been very happy with Quotes Plus data and Gary > Lyben's > > (owner/president) responsiveness. That said. > > > > > > > > > > > > In the last few days, I've swapped several e-mails about a > > minor billing issue (credit card renewed with different number) > with > > a woman in his billing department. What should have been a very > > minor clerical issue left me feeling EXTREMELY angry and offended. > > > > > > > > > > > > I vowed to switch my data feed from Quotes Plus to another data > > feed as soon as possible. This is a major issue for me because of > > the amount of AFL recoding involved, but I can no longer do > business > > with Quotes Plus. > > > > > > > > > > > > I need some options for other EOD data feeds. What EOD > > service are you using? What has your experience been? What are > > the alternatives now? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks and regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > Dan. > > > > > > > >
