FIX Drops "=" from Security ID / Ticker Symbol

, ,
1

Imported from previous forum

2

We were recently informed of a grouping of Symbology tests that needed to be completed due to NASDAQ having a new list of miscellaneous characters that they were going to incorporate into their ticker symbols (aka Security ID). In the list of characters that we ran, only one of them had issues in FIX, and that was the equals sign (’=’)

Is ‘=’ a valid FIX 4.4 character?

3

[ original email was from John Prewett - jprewett@lavatrading.com ]
> We were recently informed of a grouping of Symbology tests that needed

to be completed due to NASDAQ having a new list of miscellaneous
characters that they were going to incorporate into their ticker symbols
(aka Security ID). In the list of characters that we ran, only one of
them had issues in FIX, and that was the equals sign (‘=’)

Is ‘=’ a valid FIX 4.4 character?

I have replied to this in the General Q/A forum as it would have the same affect on any FIX version.
Here is a link to my response:
http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/379fb2a5

4

[ original email was from Clive Browning - clive.browning@rapidaddition.co.uk ]
In theory “=” is ok in any field.

The parsing logic is basically look for next “=” and then look for following “soh” (obviously with len-refer fields overriding the look for “soh” in certain cases).

So, this snippet should parse ok:

8=FIX.4.2|55=SYMBOL=BT.L|

Clive

We were recently informed of a grouping of Symbology tests that needed
to be completed due to NASDAQ having a new list of miscellaneous
characters that they were going to incorporate into their ticker
symbols (aka Security ID). In the list of characters that we ran, only
one of them had issues in FIX, and that was the equals sign (‘=’)

Is ‘=’ a valid FIX 4.4 character?

I have replied to this in the General Q/A forum as it would have the
same affect on any FIX version. Here is a link to my response:
http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/379fb2a5

5

Thanks clive…

In theory “=” is ok in any field.

The parsing logic is basically look for next “=” and then look for
following “soh” (obviously with len-refer fields overriding the look for
“soh” in certain cases).

So, this snippet should parse ok:

8=FIX.4.2|55=SYMBOL=BT.L|

Clive

We were recently informed of a grouping of Symbology tests that
needed to be completed due to NASDAQ having a new list of
miscellaneous characters that they were going to incorporate into
their ticker symbols (aka Security ID). In the list of characters
that we ran, only one of them had issues in FIX, and that was the
equals sign (‘=’)

Is ‘=’ a valid FIX 4.4 character?

I have replied to this in the General Q/A forum as it would have the
same affect on any FIX version. Here is a link to my response:
http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/379fb2a5

6

thanks john

We were recently informed of a grouping of Symbology tests that needed
to be completed due to NASDAQ having a new list of miscellaneous
characters that they were going to incorporate into their ticker
symbols (aka Security ID). In the list of characters that we ran, only
one of them had issues in FIX, and that was the equals sign (‘=’)

Is ‘=’ a valid FIX 4.4 character?

I have replied to this in the General Q/A forum as it would have the
same affect on any FIX version. Here is a link to my response:
http://fixprotocol.org/discuss/read/379fb2a5