Lot size incorrect for some symbols in Instrument List API

ishwarm
ishwarm edited July 2016 in General
Hi,

The Lot Size is showing up incorrectly for some instruments like:

GOLD16AUGFUT showing lot size as 1 (instead of 100).
USDINR16JULFUT: showing lot size as 1 (instead of 1000).

While for others it is showing correctly like:

SILVER16SEPFUT showing lot size as 30.
CRUDEOIL16JULFUT showing lot size as 100.
NIFTY16JULFUT showing lot size as 75.

Could you please check this?
Thanks,
Ishwar.
  • Kailash
    Hi @ishwarm For all commodity instruments, we use lot size as 1 and not weights (100, 30 etc.). This has now been corrected.
  • ishwarm
    ishwarm edited July 2016
    Hi @Kailash , Thanks for the fast response. Now, how can we get the weights for the Instruments? Can you arrange to pass this also as a separate column for the commodity instruments?

    And how about for CDS segment? (USDINR16JULFUT in the example above)
    Regards,
    Ishwar.
  • Kailash
    @ishwarm I'll see how we can pass weights. For commodities and currencies, we deal with lots as units (always 1). When you place orders, you have to send 1.
  • ishwarm
    ishwarm edited July 2016
    Yes, I understand that. The weights are required for some other calculations in the application. As an example, it is being used in slippage calculations. So, for a buy stop order, the Slippage Amount would be =
    (average_price - trigger_price) x (Number of Lots) x (Weight for the instrument)

    Hope this clarifies.
  • Kailash
    @ishwarm Understood. We'll see how we can include this.
  • joy
    joy edited February 2017
    The docs says
    For currencies, the int32 price values should be divided by 10000 to obtain four decimal plaes.
    For USDINR etc futures contracts, I have to further divide the quotes by 1000 to arrive at the correct values. Is it the missing multiplier values? Has it been included yet?
  • sujith
    Hi @joy,
    You are right, it should be 10000000. Thank you for pointing out, we will update documentation.
  • joy
    @sujith Thanks for the clarification.
This discussion has been closed.