Trade Performance includes "Playback"-executions

[RonnyKeller]

Whenever a new Trade Performance-Window is opened and set to a specific time-window (e.g. the last n months), it initially includes former Playback-Orders, e.g. mode "executions" or "trades" shows entries with column "Account = PLAYBACK101". This account cannot be unfiltered as it is not shown in the accounts-list. As soon as I unfilter/filter any or all accounts listed, the Playback-entries will be skipped.

This behavior seems to impact all performance-details. Assume I set to "analysis / yearly" over a given time span, I'll see initially "# trades = 250". As soon as I unfilter / filter some or all accounts (in my case: real and SIM), the # of trades reduces to 245; the 5 formerly shown Playback-trades are filtered from now on.
I think, this is a simple initialization error, but it does affect all shown stats. Playback-orders should never be included in any performance report.

[sledge]

. Playback-orders should never be included in any performance report.

Ummm how will playback users get a performance report?

That's all I use that for anyways.

[RonnyKeller]

Assume you restart the same day five times as Playback. In what universe does it make sense to include such results in a monthly performance report?? Playback results are available as long as session is active, but will be/should be reset at the end. That's why there's NO option to filter for the Playback account...

[sledge]

Playback results are available as long as session is active, but will be/should be reset at the end. That's why there's NO option to filter for the Playback account...

Did they remove the left hand side filter?

This is an old beta version image I found with sim 101 and playback fliter potions.

I'll run the most recent NT8 later on.

[RonnyKeller]

@Sledge: strange, definitely no Playback account shown in my most recent NT8 version, despite the existing 5 trades. As soon as I filter/unfilter any of the remaining accounts, the Playbacks get skipped in the performance report.
Still think they should not be included in first place, due to potential multiple runs for the same day.

[sledge]

Still think they should not be included in first place, due to potential multiple runs for the same day.

Ok the playback trades clear out when you reconnect to Playback.

But you are right

Connect to Playback. Take some trades. Disconnect.
Connect to simulated data feed. Take some trades. (Sim 101 account)

Bring up trade performance.
You cannot filter out previous playback results.

The filter list should have all trade types displayed.

[NinjaTrader_ChelseaB]

Hi sledge,

Thank you for these steps.

I was able to reproduce the behavior and have sent a report to our development.

Once I have a tracking ID for the report I will forward this to you for future reference.

[NinjaTrader_ChelseaB]

Hello sledge,

I've received ID #NTEIGHT-12991 for this behavior.

As new releases of NinjaTrader become available, please check the release notes for this ID. Once the item is marked as corrected, please update and test for the behavior.

[RonnyKeller]

You just gotta love the way this NT-guy addresses the answer to MY request to somebody else - almost feels like he'd be doing it on purpose )

[NinjaTrader_ChelseaB]

Hello RonnyKeller,

sledge was able to provide simple steps to reproduce the behavior which I was able to pass to our development.

Unfortunately, I was not able to pick these steps out of your post. Also, sledge had posted these steps before I entered the thread. That said, had sledge not provided the simple steps I would have further clarified with you and attempted to work out the steps he provided before submitting the report. So we would have gotten there, but sledge saved us some time and it is appreciated.

[RonnyKeller]

So, what you're basically trying to say is this: Sledge could understand my initial request while you couldn't? Think, this speaks a ton for itself; perhaps Sledge should rather take your job then...

[NinjaTrader_ChelseaB]

Hello RonnyKeller,

I'm saying that when I reviewed this thread sledge had worked out the simple steps needed to report the issue.

I absolutely would have worked with you by asking clarifying questions to get those same simple steps had sledge not provided these.

Are you insisting that it would be a more productive use of our time for me to have ignored the works sledge had done and gone back to clarify with you to get to the same steps that sledge provided?

[RonnyKeller]

@ChelseaB: Nope, I think you're right.