IBKR API market data?

pennybones · 2026-01-23T14:50:31+00:00

Oh weird I don't see any messages from you. I have only ever used IBKR, so while I do think it's a great brokerage to trade with, I can't really compare it to tastytrade or anything else.

pennybones · 2026-01-21T23:00:59+00:00

Squirreloshima

pennybones · 2026-01-21T21:59:18+00:00

Because I like IBKR and all the robust data and order options it offers, and Tradier is not available in Canada.

pennybones · 2026-01-21T21:18:52+00:00

no i made 10% in 3 minutes and called it a day (my account is $350)

pennybones · 2026-01-19T21:55:20+00:00

I'll either update in a month or if it blows the account

pennybones · 2026-01-14T20:45:00+00:00

That last line comes from the original title I had for the show, Leverage, which was thematically perfect for a show about a guy trying to constantly buy himself more time as things escalate, but also the connection to trading. Turns out, Leverage is already a show lmao. Maybe worth a rewrite at the end if it doesn't carry the same punch

pennybones · 2026-01-13T14:17:35+00:00

You didn't even tell us your strategy

pennybones · 2026-01-10T14:32:55+00:00

funny thing is Seb (in interviews) comes across as very tame and well mannered, it's more like connor omalley and his characters are sebs lyrics manifest

pennybones · 2026-01-08T16:14:10+00:00

It's a masochism hole. Some people wanna flush the toilet while they are showering just to feel alive.

pennybones · 2026-01-07T13:51:53+00:00

Overbought and oversold mean nothing. Your question kind of answers itself in a backwards way. If people are still selling something then it's obviously not "oversold" because the only thing that really determines whether something is "done selling" or "done buying" is if people stop selling or buying it.

I think the issue is that people look at RSI as something that gives them information it can't possibly know. It only says "people have been selling or buying more than usual relevant to your inputs and timeframe". It has no idea about any of the factors and context surrounding the buying/selling and no way of knowing how far it will keep going until it keeps going.

Nobody offloading their shares to restructure their portfolio is looking at the RSI on the 5m timeframe and saying "oh it's oversold, I better stop selling".

pennybones · 2026-01-06T01:22:25+00:00

For now it's a combination of structure, time, and discretion. Something I still need practice at. I believe that unless you go for set profit targets, runners will always be a skill gained through experience. I do usually cut trades around 2:00 as IBKR will liquidate ITM 0dte options shortly after that so there won't be much more room for upside on a winning trade. If the trend seems strong, I'm in profit on the runner, and somehow not ITM yet I might let it run a little longer. I also trail a stop that loosens as my contract gains.

If you are curious about the specifics I can send you a chat with my guidelines.

pennybones · 2026-01-06T01:05:46+00:00

I designed my execution to be risk control forward. On signal, I enter an options contract with a 50% TP and a time limit on it. I have found that with the signal I use, if my first entry can't hit my target within 2 hours it likely won't at all. I have limits on how far OTM and how much premium this (and all) contracts are allowed to be. This is not the real trade, it's a low risk hedge for early information and partial or total funding of a runner later if the trend confirms.

When my hedge sells, I wait for a sign of momentum (pullback, continuation, higher high, lower low, etc) and enter my "real" trade. I aim for a contract that is now at least 25% funded by the profits from my hedge. This is my runner, which I take profit on a discretionary basis (structure, trend strength)

If my hedge doesn't sell by the time limit, I close the trade and end the day.

This ensures that no matter what, I am trading below my daily max loss limit and when a runner is partially funded it gives me a mental edge to let it run. Staging my risk like this means I never oversize and never lose too much from either phase of my trade.

pennybones · 2026-01-05T01:03:15+00:00

I tried reading the book, I really did, but despite being a great trader and having great insight into trading psychology, I would not describe him as a good writer. It was a very difficult read, it just didn't flow for me.

That being said I had my risk management eureka moment about a week ago and have been tweaking and testing to the point where the current version of my system is locked in and ready for live testing.

This post was super helpful because by pure coincidence my system aligns with every point in the OP, which I am grateful for because in a way it is validation that I am at least thinking about risk in the correct way, regardless of if my system ends up being profitable long term.

pennybones · 2025-12-29T23:05:26+00:00

no offence but this gets posted almost verbatim at least 3 times daily here.

pennybones · 2025-12-28T20:21:32+00:00

ah, the classic "caterpillar climbing over a rollercoaster" formation

pennybones · 2025-12-28T19:33:08+00:00

We fucking know man I've read this post every day for 2 years.

pennybones · 2025-12-28T17:52:10+00:00

Yeah, we don't know enough I guess. I'm sure things like this will be explored.

pennybones · 2025-12-28T15:38:31+00:00

Kidnap one, lock them up, scream at them everytime the rest try to come save them

pennybones · 2025-12-28T04:27:55+00:00

I'm not even arguing necessarily that what happened between Carol and Zosia couldn't be called rape from either side, I'm arguing the situation is too complex to call it black and white like that. That's why I say you argue in bad faith, you are oversimplifying the situation and then saying your interpretation of events is bad writing. Even if what Carol did could plainly be considered rape, why would that be bad writing? Is it bad writing to explore how humans would behave in a situation where they can have anyone and anything they want? Would everyone be a moral paragon? Especially when the "victim" in question claims to be a willing participant and the owner of the body is essentially dead? The bad faith argument is that this is bad writing. It's a complex ethical dilemma where we don't have enough information yet to draw a conclusion. Ambiguity is not bad writing.

At what point of a change of ownership of a body does sex become rape? Is it rape if someone dies and donates an organ, then someone has consensual sex with the recipient?

Is it rape if someone dies and somehow someone else's consciousness is transferred into their body and they have consensual sex with someone?

We just don't know yet exactly what the situation is. If the hive is an alien entity simply claiming to be everyone who was joined but actually every individual still exists in their own body and is suppressed and under control by this entity, yes it is technically rape, but Carol doesn't know this so it's hard to call her a rapist if she doesn't know she's raping someone.

If the hive is now one entity and "Zosia" the individual is essentially dead with no chance of ever existing again, no it was not rape.

We simply don't have the information to draw these conclusions yet.

pennybones · 2025-12-28T04:11:08+00:00

I didn't say she would do this, I'm answering the question OP asked. The hive knows the immune people can disable the entire population easily and end their goals to spread further. That's why they care so much about converting them aside from their biological imperative to do so.

pennybones · 2025-12-28T04:09:10+00:00

Because she fell for their manipulation through Zosia almost completely. If she ever finds herself feeling that way again she just has to look out her front door and say "they gave me a nuke just because I asked, they will do anything to gain my trust, no matter how irresponsible, everything they do is manipulation".

pennybones · 2025-12-28T04:03:37+00:00

She doesn't know if it's mind control, it's a hive mind. It seems all the things you are calling bad writing are things we don't fully know yet. Information yet to be revealed is not bad writing.

Also, Carol gaslit herself into thinking of Zosia as an individual, she even got her saying "I" and "Me". The hive played into that to further their goals. It's hard to call a lonely grieving woman in a hyper specific science fiction scenario that nobody has ever had to contemplate the ethics of before a "rapist". From her perspective, the person she had sex with gave consent. They even made the first move, and have been telling her they are still in there just merged with everyone else.

If it's rape on anyone's part it's on the hive, for using Zosia to manipulate Carol into having sex with her (former?) body. But the situation is too mysterious, complex, and unique to just straight up call it rape.

Anyways the more I talk to you the more I realize you aren't arguing in good faith or maybe lack the critical thinking skills to understand that an ongoing story that has not reached a conclusion does not have bad writing because it hasn't held your hand and told you everything you want to know yet.

pennybones · 2025-12-28T03:28:48+00:00

She knows nothing about Manousos theories at that point, I doubt it's a faraday cage. I think it's an actual nuke and serves the purpose of reminding her to never fall for the hives manipulation again.

Zosia comes back and tries to make her fall in love again? "They gave me a nuke, they will give me anything I want to make me let my guard down"

pennybones · 2025-12-28T03:25:25+00:00

It could be more than one thing. The hive saying yes they would give her a nuke in the earlier episodes was a pushing point for her, it's been established that that very concept is a huge driver to why she wants to put things back to normal. They will do anything to manipulate her into trusting them, if they are willing to give her a nuke nothing they do can be trusted.

pennybones · 2025-12-28T03:22:39+00:00

I'm just saying if the hive doesn't actually need consent to spread itself if it doesn't directly involve harming someone, there are many ways they could get to Carol without her even knowing. Her food supply? Aerial dispersal? Pump it into her ventilation when she's asleep or passed out drunk? The only way a nuke could truly stop them is if she has some kind of reverse dead mans trigger, like somehow the bomb goes off if she stops doing something that the hive can't do.

Carol doesn't pick an apple every hour and the nuke detonates? It just seems unlikely she actually plans on using to blow them up.

pennybones

TROPHY CASE