Auto-start-WealthSignals-publishing

Publishing signals manually doesn't take much time but allows you to overlook them and catch potential errors, making sure your system's subscribers get the correct signals.

What about fixing erroneous signals entered automatically, how would this process work?

You can review/modify those during the 15 minute review window from anywhere using a mobile device through wealthsignals website.

Is it really such a timer saver? I mean, it litertally takes a few seconds to open the WS Publisher, click login, then click Run all Strategies. It seems like we'd be doing alot of development to save someone maybe 2 seconds a day?

I added something to my comment above.

Erroneous signals don't really happen with the Publisher, unless there's an underlying data issue. But sure, it's always best if you're able to check any potential out-of-sync positions and take care of them manually.

For that reason, I still like the idea of the auto publish as a backup in case you forget. I've been publishing signals every session for about 6 years, and 2 or 3 times a year something will still distract me enough to make me miss publishing for one or more systems.

QUOTE:
Is it really such a timer saver?

It's not necessarily about time. It's about remembering to do it everyday.

QUOTE:
It's not necessarily about time. It's about remembering to do it everyday.

So true!

I would support this if it was a feature request. I would like it to be like: you set everyday auto run (and auto signals publishing) and you can be sure that as long as WL7 is running your signals will be published every day.

QUOTE:
but allows you to overlook them and catch potential errors

It's for predubugging or for test period, not a part of everyday routine of course.

QUOTE:
It seems like we'd be doing alot of development to save someone maybe 2 seconds a day

Maybe I'm not good at how the whole process looks like, but it's more than 2 seconds, and you need to invest your everyday efforts for not forgetting to do it and do it in time.

You may leave it manual of course (especially if there are no many votes), but my vote is here too).

QUOTE:
Erroneous signals don't really happen with the Publisher, unless there's an underlying data issue. But sure, it's always best if you're able to check any potential out-of-sync positions and take care of them manually.

The WSP for WL6 had a safety net with its checks for duplicate signals and out-of-sync positions. Yet erroneous signals do happen with the author:

https://www.wealthsignals.com/Forum/Posts/I-sent-WFC-signal-as-Cover-on-10-15-21-should-be-a-Buy-1481

QUOTE:
It's for predubugging or for test period, not a part of everyday routine of course.

If you're serious about publishing signals to subs this should be part of your everyday routine, don't you think so?

QUOTE:
If you're serious about publishing signals to subs this should be part of your everyday routine, don't you think so?

I don't think so at all).

Are we really talking about algorithmic trading?)) - Looks like we aren't, but I am!

Many things can go wrong while automatic trading (or signals publishing) - it doesn't mean you shouldn't trade automatically)).

You don't need to mix the sparrows and the nightingales. What can go wrong? If it WL7 - it's up to WL7 team to ensure it works OK, and it's up to trader to control that. If it's the strategy - it's up to trader to insure and to control the strategy logic and code. Bad data. No matter what can go wrong, many thing can be automated... automatically checked.

You are now choosing wheather to invest your efforts in this request or to do something else. I want to have my chance to choose too)) - whether to invest efforts in strategies debugging and data integrity checks etc., or to do this boring boring routine)). And this have nothing to deal with being serios as a publisher).

If the algorithm is working right, there should not be any issues with the signals and any anomalies can be seen in the 15 minute window on wealthsignals website prior to being published as that's where you have to modify the signals even if you submit them manually from WL7.

So maybe I have high ambitions and am overly optimistic but I plan on winning the 2022 investing championship utilizing my WL7 developed trading strategy.

I'd then be able to market my strategy from all the press I'd recieve from that win by using WL7 as an automated platform that one can set up and subscribe to my strategy through wealthsignals and automatically recieve and automatically place those trades to their brokerage using WL7.

None of this of course would be possible (for a novice computer programmer like myself) without the awesome customer support from Quantacula team that makes their customers' feature requests a priority which in turn makes my overly optimistic trading goal a reality.

Wow, best of luck!

Here's a another log for the fire -

Subscribers get used to a routine when to expect signals. If the signals don't arrive around the usual time, they sometimes write support@wealthsignals to ask about the signals for the day - like last Thursday for Deterministic Knife Juggler :)

Auto-publishing would keep everyone on schedule - even if you're running late one day.

QUOTE:
Auto-publishing would keep everyone on schedule - even if you're running late one day.

Make it a program switch like Cone suggested (which seems like a more robust option) and WS authors may not know about the hidden feature. Make it a GUI option and they may still occasionally start the program late.

Definitely. The idea is to program a switch in the Task Scheduler to start WL7, update data and then publish. Even if you just used it as a backup to run at 9am ET, it can save you from missing your signals.

If you had already published for the day, the backup run will just be ignored... but you'd have to make sure the backup run doesn't occur during the 15-min grace period. That would potentially duplicate signals.

QUOTE:
Definitely. The idea is to program a switch in the Task Scheduler to start WL7, update data and then publish. Even if you just used it as a backup to run at 9am ET, it can save you from missing your signals.

Will it work if WL7 has already been running?

No, it would start a new instance.

No?
Shouldn't that be, "Yes, it would start a new instance."

Of course you're right. The question looked like as spanning another instance would be undesirable by Rep_m or something.

Everything will work fine - great.