I've been with QP EOD for many years now and after looking at several other data suppliers, I would not change.
The data integrity is very good. The AB interface is fast. There is a caveat that everybody should be aware of however: Back at the top of the dot com bubble, QP had over 10K common stocks in the database. Now there are just over 5500 common stocks in the database. So as companies come and go, QP drops them from the database. Why is this an issue you might ask... Removing dead issues from the database results in a psuedo "looking forward" aspect to your backtesting results. In other words, if failed companies are removed from your database by the nice folks at QP, then you are being deprived of seeing how your backtested systems would have been affected using the data from those failed stocks. Several years ago, someone claimed that CSI retained the data for these dead companies in their database, but over the years I've looked at CSI and have been disappointed at their charges while not being convinced about the exact nature of the data they supply. --- In [email protected], "Howard B" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > 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
