GTD-order

Cone already made a start, it would be nice provide it more compact.

https://www.wealth-lab.com/Discussion/Cancel-placed-order-at-broker-via-code-8080

It might be, that other people are interested too.

https://www.wealth-lab.com/Discussion/TWS-OCA-and-Trade-Stacking-8115

There's a scenario in this thread where a GTD order could be a good idea when combined with a MOC/LOC order.
https://www.wealth-lab.com/Discussion/TWS-OCA-and-Trade-Stacking-8115

The scenario is that the strategy will exit a position at limit/stop or MOC. If the limit/stop order doesn't fill during the day, it needs to be canceled about 10 minutes before the close, at which time you won't be able to cancel MOC/LOC orders. Otherwise, an overfill is possible.

Yes, i understand it is a special context. Perhaps there will be an opportunity to generalize this. Maybe the approach from the first thread can be taken as a basis. With a request there is at least a chance of implementation, without a request rather not :-).

You need make a case for why GTD would be required convince others to vote for the request. Just because it's offered in the IB API is not a good reason.

So far, the only scenario (and it's a real edge case because never in my life have I required it) is so that you can place a limit (and/or stop) order with a MOC/LOC order on the same day to prevent an overfill.

Aside from that EOD case, Wealth-Lab already cancels orders automatically when a Strategy no longer requires the order to be live. So, why else would GTD be required? Context is important.

Ok. Here are some arguments.

In fact, WL cancels the order by default. However, the design logic is not relevant. The point is that an order has a certain lifetime.
Whether an order must be canceled by default or must be kept alive is only a question of perspective. Therefor, in the WL design/framework it must be kept alive.

Now the reasons why an order should be active for a certain time frame.

Trading

● Gives the trader the flexibility to choose time periods that extend beyond the time frame of the strategy, with no need to manage the trigger for the order.
● If an order is not executed due to lack of liquidity, the order can be filled slowly based on the trigger
● Price conditions may repeat but the trigger is not available

Wealthlab

● Order will be active even if WL is offline
● Order can be available for next trading session
● Allows less data load in the strategy monitor, because the order does not need to be reconstructed

There are certainly many other reasons, but I think they are enough to express that real factors can be addressed.

Since we're talking about automated trading from a Strategy, the design is relevant. You can always use your broker's discretionary trading interface and place orders like this. GTD orders are in no way relevant to intraday trading with the Strategy Monitor.

Let me help you out here..
"I trade Weekly and Monthly strategies, so I'd like to place GTD orders that automatically cancel at the end of the week/month."

Of course i accept that you don't see a reason to implement it.
Just by saying it is not relevant for intraday trading lacks a reason.

A simple information like "The order should have a dynamic lifetime" is 100% independent on the design, framework and timeframe.
It is only about the content, not the implementation details. It is just an abstract concept.

To argue that in lower time frame a content like "dynamic liftime for an order" does not exist, is nonsense. Why shouldn't there be good reasons? If there is a trigger and the order will not filled with the next bar, why should it not be filled within the next 5 bars? The trigger may no longer be present with the next time slot, but i still might want to fill this order.

Most of the great features WL8 provides are useless for a single user. A single user only needs a fraction of them. The cool part of it, everybody has its own favorites. If I can't do anything with an indicator, I don't claim that it is useless. Think about it.

Honestly, thank you Cone for looking into it.

WL is already a strong backtesting tool. To make it a monster tool, it needs a lot improvement in the auto trading context. I know, step by step ... The order type capabilities are very limited compared to trading platforms. The earlier this is accepted, the better for the WL Trading section.

Posted Feature Request relevant to this issue here: https://www.wealth-lab.com/Discussion/MOC-Order-Cancels-Conflicting-Orders-9013