Can NT strategy handle tight stop volatile mkt /wo stopping?

[giogio1]

After lot of reading and many experiments I still have a major fundamental question and days of search on the forum have been not able to provide an answer to me.

I need to gain clarity about a fundamental concept about the NinjaTrader orders-executions handling.

After many experiments I concluded that with StopCancelCloseIgnoreRejects or IgnoreAllErrors, with any type of handling in the OnOrderUpdate() block, the strategy still terminates.

Can I avoid to have a strategy to stop AFTER a rejection or I must always prevent the rejection?
I am underlying the work AFTER because so far all the answers seem to indicate that rejection can only be prevented in order not to have a strategy to terminate prematurely.

This is because I cannot prevent all rejection as I keep very tight stops, even assuring that the stop order are below the bid but a couple of ticks.

In other words, I think there is no way with tight stops to prevent rejection errors.

So there is no way to avoid a strategy from terminating when a change order error or rejection happens (with very tight stops) ?

In other words, are there actions that can be coded AFTER a rejection to prevent the strategy from terminating in the OnOrderUpdate() ?
If yes what are the action to be taken?

I wouldn't want to substitute all stops with market orders that trigger below a certain price because if I implement orders with this methodology the stop won't stay on the server. I hope this statement is correct.

Please help me to clarify this topic once for all, it seems to me impossible that NinjaTrader8 cannot prevent a strategy from terminating using tight stops in high volatility markets.

Thank you.
Gio
PS My main execution structure is basically that of "ManagedRithmicIBFriendlyExample" beucase it seems the one that might get me closer to the solution.

[NinjaTrader_Jesse]

Hello giogio1,

That depends on what reason the strategy is terminating, we would need specific details on what problem you are seeing that is disabling the strategy.

If you need custom rejection handling you would need to use one of the options you selected depending on the scenario.

[giogio1]

Would you kindly help me to understand the rationale behind what you're saying?

Because I truly don't see the logic.

If I have an error in the execution or in the order, in my case, in most of the cases, I can simply close all positions and restart from scratch my trading logic..And I can check the congruency with the account's real positions.

By having the system terminate the strategy, it does not allow me to restart it.

What you're suggesting is that I consider every possibility of failure, which can be a very high number, and to try to prevent it. That is an unimaginably burdensome time-consuming task that makes no sense when I could simply close all positions if something fails.

Gio
Ps. I'd like to keep this thread focused on the NinjaTrader philosophy and in another thread I'll discuss the specific of the various situations that I'll have to code.

[NinjaTrader_Jesse]

Hello giogio1,

The default action when a rejection happens is to disable the strategy so it stops trying to do the action which is causing a problem, that prevents unwanted positions and allows you to manually mitigate the problem. A majority of users need this feature enabled to avoid having a strategy place erroneous trades after a problem occurs. We only suggest adding custom rejection handling if you are a very advanced programmer who has the ability to foresee what problems the code you have made will have and accommodate those problems in code, if you don't do that correctly that could lead to the strategy going out of control and having major problems or uncontrolled losses.

I won't be able to go over philosophy with you so if that is the purpose of this post we will need to stop this conversation here. If you have a specific problem please instead post the details about that. We need to know what specific issue happened in order to provide specific assistance.

[giogio1]

Thank you Jesse. It's good to know that you can't continue the conversation and we stop it here. Thank you for your clarity. Please know that your answer about philosophy is quite useful because when a programmer like me starts tackling these issues, spins around for a month prior finally taking a direction because of the complexity of this topic. So my intention is not to change NinjaTrader philosophy but to understand which is the simplest way to obtain dependable executions. NinjaTrader knows far more than me, so I wouldn't try to change things and the more I delve into this topic the more I see how well this platform is conceived.
Thank you again for your excellent support. I know it can be frustrating, also for me, but probably necessary to figure all this out.
Best,
Gio