Imported from previous forum
Dear All,
I am really confused with the applicability of OnBehalfOfCompId(Tag 115) and ExecBroker(Tag 76) in FIX 4.2 protocol.
My understanding is that if the connecting entity wants to place an order in the exchange on behalf of third party firm i.e. some other Trading Member which is third party, it populate the value of that Trading Member in Tag 76.
If that is so, then how it is different from OnBehalfOfCompId(Tag 115)?
Tks in advance…
Biren,
One quick difference that I note is that the values in tag 76 have to be standard NASD MM mnemonic while tag 115 can have any String value.
If your question is more about the need for this tag 76 when we already have Tag 115 - then probably someone who uses this tag might be able to elaborate.
Vikash
Dear All,
I am really confused with the applicability of OnBehalfOfCompId(Tag 115) and ExecBroker(Tag 76) in FIX 4.2 protocol.My understanding is that if the connecting entity wants to place an order in the exchange on behalf of third party firm i.e. some other Trading Member which is third party, it populate the value of that Trading Member in Tag 76.
If that is so, then how it is different from OnBehalfOfCompId(Tag 115)?
Tks in advance…
[ original email was from Toby Corballis - toby.corballis@rapidaddition.com ]
> Dear All,
I am really confused with the applicability of OnBehalfOfCompId(Tag 115) and ExecBroker(Tag 76) in FIX 4.2 protocol.
My understanding is that if the connecting entity wants to place an order in the exchange on behalf of third party firm i.e. some other Trading Member which is third party, it populate the value of that Trading Member in Tag 76.
If that is so, then how it is different from OnBehalfOfCompId(Tag 115)?
Tks in advance…
Hi Biren,
You are correct in your understanding of Tag 76. Tag 115 is more for order routing and might be populated when, for example, an order routing hub delivers a message to CounterParty-X on behalf of Counterparty-Y.
So, then you would have something like this:
Sender CompID (Tag 49) = [order routing hub]
Target CompID (Tag 56) = [Counterparty-X]
Onbehalfof CompID (Tag 115) = [Counterparty-Y]
You wouldn’t use Tag 115 if there was just you sending messages directly to your counterparty.
Hope that makes sense.
Dear All,
I am really confused with the applicability of OnBehalfOfCompId(Tag 115) and ExecBroker(Tag 76) in FIX 4.2 protocol.My understanding is that if the connecting entity wants to place an order in the exchange on behalf of third party firm i.e. some other Trading Member which is third party, it populate the value of that Trading Member in Tag 76.
If that is so, then how it is different from OnBehalfOfCompId(Tag 115)?
Tks in advance…
Hi Biren,
You are correct in your understanding of Tag 76. Tag 115 is more for order routing and might be populated when, for example, an order routing hub delivers a message to CounterParty-X on behalf of Counterparty-Y.
So, then you would have something like this:
Sender CompID (Tag 49) = [order routing hub]
Target CompID (Tag 56) = [Counterparty-X]
Onbehalfof CompID (Tag 115) = [Counterparty-Y]You wouldn’t use Tag 115 if there was just you sending messages directly to your counterparty.
Hope that makes sense.
Hi
Just to clarify something here - in the situation you are describing (i.e. routing orders to an execution venue on behalf of another broker), then 115 is definitely the one to use, not 76. 76 is intended more for clearing-related functions such as step-outs and give-ups. For example if BROKER-A is using BROKER-B as a ‘service bureau’ to route to an exchange, then BROKER-B’s message to the exchange would include tag 115=BROKER-A. If, after execution, a subsequent message (say, an allocation message) was generated that referenced the same trade, then that could (if needed) contain 76=BROKER-A (note - not BROKER-B).
Jim.
Tks Jim for the reply. But still I am little bit more inclined towards believing that the Tag 76 is the right tag to be used in the aforementioned scenario. As per your suggestion, Tag 76 is more of a use in cases of step-outs or give-ups, but if we look at the FIX4.2 Errata, the description of Tag 76 specifically mentions that it can be used for third party transactions. So I belive, Tag 115 is more appropriate to use for physical routing of orders while Tag 76 makes more business sense when the third party transactions are involved.
Your take please…
Regards,
Biren Dave