We're in two domains, trading and programming. So often you just need an expert from one or the other.

Beer is probably the answer.

@Charles, so true; we are kind of stuck between two separate worlds at times.

@Chris, now those are words of wisdom!

I actually understand this problem. With ideas which I am unwilling to discuss openly due to intellectual property issues. Because of this I discuss them with my brother who is electrical/mechanical engineer.

Many good ideas must've died because of this problem.

It is indeed very easy to let a good idea slip away from you because you can't quite get it fleshed out by yourself. Personally I have found the people (especially experienced traders/developers) I tend to discuss this type of thing with don't need my ideas, they have plenty of their own. Many of my best ideas have been the result of a very casual comment from someone I was discussing an unrelated issue with.

Yes I faced such problems....and I solved successfully by converting the problem to be discussed into other domains and discuss solution approach...later bring them to your desired domain

I know an excellent coder who designed c+ based programs which use FIX API.

I have the same issue , I will study EL and try to code my self. The best idea is to have a Bus. partner that you can trust and he knows how to code.

I face the same situation Scott and am basically operating as a one man team which covers everything from strategy conception to low level coding of indicators, and backtesting to produce equity curves. Feel free to reach out to me if you'd like to compare notes.

@Jim - I re-read my profile but couldn't find the person you mentioned but then I realized you were referring to some of the people who wrote recommendations. Indeed, I know some really, really good people in many different areas.

@John, please feel free to do likewise. Seeing Jim's message reminded me of a Skype conversation he and I had regarding some matter or another and I happened to mention a separate issue that had been rankling me for quite a while. He said something to the effect of "why don't you just ..."

It was a true Homer Simpson moment D'oh; why hadn't I ever thought of that. His offhand comment made a huge difference in my way of approaching the issue.

If it is simply a coding issue, then you could get away with it here, but if it is the "idea" and propitiatory that is a different question. Can you separate the two? Thanks, David

Scott - Actually I was referring to your good self as an "an excellent coder". Your mileage may vary I suppose?!

The "excellent coder" moniker may well also apply to the recommenders you refer to.

@Jim, that is very kind of you. Once you have been associated with some of the programmers I have, it is then becomes quite difficult to ever think of yourself as "an excellent coder" again.

@David, these are usually logic issues that derive from proprietary situations. As I mentioned above, I have largely ceased to worry about someone making off with my ideas. Given days, weeks or months of coding and they too can implement the concept and best wishes to them if they can/do.

I think working in silo is a problem for many of us. I do much of my coding, but can't keep up with the number of ideas I hope to test. I too would love to have go to person or a couple to discuss development ideas and issues. I recently embarked on developing a trading platform with some unique features geared for those entering professional roles. So far I have been bootstrapping the project from my personal funds. I am hoping to interest an investor with seed capital to hire developers. Recruiting talent in exchange for equity in a fledgeling start up is challenging. Finding a co-founder with the right mix of trading/coding/business/vision and that is willing and able has also presented a challenge.

@Ron It seems we have gone down similar paths. Years ago I was trading with a prop firm and wanted to go remote. They agreed as long as I came in through their risk management system which it turns out could only be done via custom code. Over the years that morphed into a full blow trading system. One thing lead to another and now it has modules that handle the data feeds, analytics, signal generation, trade execution/management and dashboard functions. It was not what I intended to do and I wouldn't wish that process on anyone else for sure.

A case in point - Redis is fantastic for handling messaging both between processes on the same machine and distributed over a network. On the same machine it is fast enough for anything but true HFT and it has the added benefit of allowing the various modules to be distributed over a lan or even over a wan and allows for using different languages for different modules depending on the best language for the task.

Figuring out how to use Redis was painful not on the surface but all the little gotchas; it would have been great to have been able to discuss that with someone using similar technology.

Give out bits and pieces when you can but not the whole thing. And as others have suggested, can you separate the code effort from the idea discussion? Otherwise it's challenging to talk about ideas. I know some people that I stood next to on the floor years ago and those are the only people I can bounce ideas off of and trust. I've talked to some people in the HFT space before and for all I know they are using my ideas, but if you want dialog it's a risk you have to take.

@William, I mostly agree with your thoughts but I still maintain that no one really needs my ideas. I have mentioned this story in the past but it bears repeating.

As an experiment, I once offered full trade setups that I use virtually every day. I had a decent number of traders take me up on my offer but of those, most wanted at a minimum the exact parameters and all my back test results and at least one person was outraged that I wouldn't just send him the code.

As to whether or not anyone fully implemented any of the setups I mentioned, I do not know but I can say they work as well or better today than they did a few years back when I first offered them so whatever came of it, it didn't negatively affect me.

I guess that besides the code, general trading behavior also can be discusses without breaking any secret. What I mean is that you can ask if you should compare look for bid/ask/last trade to do a calculation, or if you should send a Limit/Stop/Market order. Maybe it's one level up the code, but still no magic there.

@Leonardo, I agree. I think we as independent traders travel a very difficult road, one we make more difficult by often insisting on travelling it alone. If anyone wants to know anything about FX or CME order types, rules, etc. please feel free to send me a pm.

Maybe others could chime in with a description of the area(s) where they feel comfortable discussing things or giving advice. There turned out to be a lot less secret sauce and a lot more hard work in trading (and especially developing algorithms) than I thought there would be when I first started trading.

In my case, my programmers have been instrumental in implementing my ideas (worked with them for years), and you develop a 'language' to explain how the algo works, terminology, and what adjustments are needed. You give them settings sufficient to [back]test your idea functionally....but they don't need the 'master' or more complex settings that you may use for regular proprietary trading.

Trading is inherently selfish. But the key is to realize that you must open up enough to make yourself transparent and also show investors that you are not yet another con artists trying to part them with their funds.

I work for a quant asset management as a programmer. I can't open what are our strategies, but frequently I talk to college fellows that are in other assets about this more public information. Specially about how to handle backtesting generic scenarios and more low level trading behaviors (like what to expect when you send an order to the exchange). I guess that all boils down to common sense.

I would say be careful about discussing matters of intellectual property with persons outside of your team. If in doubt, get your line manager to ok it. Don't leave a electronic paper trail - such things can get you fired.

What's better is to find actual people and meet them face to face, then you can network at the same time. Look for local meet ups or conferences.

@Leonardo and @John - it sounds like you are in much different situations than the individual trader/developer. It must be very good to have support around you to help out with issues. While I can categorically state I make a terrible employee, there are times the thought of being in a big enough organization to even have a manager sounds appealing. Of course, that thought never lasts long enough for me to pursue it.

Step back a bit. It is said until you can explain your problem to a 4 year old, you don't really understand the problem. If you are looking to your coligues, you are looking for them to solve your problem. If you are looking to solve your problem for yourself, look to a good listener that is ethical not necessarily technically accomplished. And if you are just looking to complain, maybe you already know the answer to that.

@Colin, wow, whoever said that must have a very impressive four year old.

HI there. The first thing to do is sign an NDA so your ideas/methodologies will be protected (as much as they can be protected). Actually whenever we are asked to develop an algo i insist that a NDA is signed to avoid any misunderstandings. I have found that a lot of people have ideas that think they are unique but are not. Secondly ask for samples of previous work they have done so you can gauge experience levels (not claimed but actual). Thirdly, as someone else suggested, you can break the system into modules that do not do anything on their own OR if you have a lot of parameters do not reveal what they should be but leave this for your own testing. Lastly do your testing using a proper testing facility so you will simulate and test your system with maximum modelling quality.

Hopefully, if you are at a stage where you need to discuss complicated design issues, you should already have extracted the abstractions away which allows you to discuss the actual design, and not the underlying proprietary content!

@Julien, I agree in general but where that tends to break down for me is when I encounter what at first appears to a corner case. Often until I get to the specific implementation I may not realize that was appears to be a corner case is in fact a sign that my abstraction itself is incorrect or incomplete.

I have found that if I discuss actual situations I get more clarity around what I am doing. For example, if I were to decide to fade a move to the upside, I could argue that I can place a sell order at the high of the move or at the close of the move (or a tick above if the move closed on the bid). All that seems reasonable enough until you get a book sweep with no follow through vs a book sweep followed by an opposite side aggressor. If you don't sort through that issue, you could find you are consistently placing orders that have little or no chance of actually being filled or you are too close to the market moving against you and you get fills you don't want.

Understood, @Scott - I guess you are talking more about trading-specific corner cases than actual algorithm design.

@Julien Yes, I was referring to trading specific corner cases. Most if not all of my algos have one thing in common - they put numbers to what a good tape reader can easily see and then automate the response to those conditions. Doing that turned out to be much more challenging than I thought it would be but in the end, worth the effort.