Imported from previous forum
The spec seems to imply that if you are reporting a manual order, then it should have its own allocation instruction, and you should not also include FIX orders with that - i.e., that if manual, then NoOrders should be 1, and the single ClOrdID should be ‘MANUAL’.
Is it be ok to combine several fix orders with a manual component in one fix allocation? An example is a block order worked in an oms with one broker via several successive fix orders, followed by a manual order for the balance. The block order is allocated in the oms to the accounts, and it would be desirable to present those allocated quantities as computed for the block, rather than trying to split them out across the multiple allocation messages.
An alternative would be to present the entire block as one manual order, but the first approach seems better if generally supported.
[ original email was from Jim Kaye - jim.kaye@gs.com ]
Hi,
It’s definitely OK to mix manual and electronic orders. The manual orders all have ClOrdId = ‘Manual’; the electronic orders all have rel ClOrdIDs. The wording I think you’re referring to in the spec (i.e. the comments against the NoOrders field in the allocation message) describes a case where all the orders are manual - even there it’s OK to have multiple manual orders references.
Best regards,
Jim Kaye
FIX Allocations Working Group
> The spec seems to imply that if you are reporting a manual order, then it should have its own allocation instruction, and you should not also include FIX orders with that - i.e., that if manual, then NoOrders should be 1, and the single ClOrdID should be ‘MANUAL’.
>
> Is it be ok to combine several fix orders with a manual component in one fix allocation? An example is a block order worked in an oms with one broker via several successive fix orders, followed by a manual order for the balance. The block order is allocated in the oms to the accounts, and it would be desirable to present those allocated quantities as computed for the block, rather than trying to split them out across the multiple allocation messages.
>
> An alternative would be to present the entire block as one manual order, but the first approach seems better if generally supported.
>