I tried reduce_only but it fails for limit orders - only works for taker orders.
I tried reduce_only but it fails for limit orders - only works for taker orders.
2026-06-20 · Kalshi · 8 条相关讨论
I tried reduce_only but it fails for limit orders - only works for taker orders.
I tried reduce_only but it fails for limit orders - only works for taker orders.
they axed that too though. You cannot use reduce only on resting orders for some reason
they axed that too though. You cannot use reduce only on resting orders for some reason
Not having reduce only on resting orders only makes sense as a design if they want less liquidity on the markets since people now need to use IoT instead of resting orders that provide liquidity. We wouldn't even need the sell vs buy if we has a proper reduce only mode for resting orders
Not having reduce only on resting orders only makes sense as a design if they want less liquidity on the markets since people now need to use IoT instead of resting orders that provide liquidity. We wouldn't even need the sell vs buy if we has a proper reduce only mode for resting orders
What would you expect to happen if you're long 40 contracts and you place a reduce-only resting sell for 50 contracts?
What would you expect to happen if you're long 40 contracts and you place a reduce-only resting sell for 50 contracts?
it would error and not be placed, exactly as it did in v1
it would error and not be placed, exactly as it did in v1
also as it does currently with the webstie which does have a specific sell feature like that
also as it does currently with the webstie which does have a specific sell feature like that
Ok, I guess I just see it as having much more utility with a taker order as it can just cancel the remainder. With a resting, it's like hey dumdum you don't have that many.
Ok, I guess I just see it as having much more utility with a taker order as it can just cancel the remainder. With a resting, it's like hey dumdum you don't have that many.
the matching engine has no concept of buy no being different from sell yes. that's just a cosmetic field for the frontend. separately, there is still the reduce only flag in the v2 order create. expressiveness from v1 hasn't changed. but reduce only is a little bit strange, because it's only used when the order is aggressing. like what would you expect if you're +30, you place an order for -20. then, you place a new order for -20 that fills. so now you're +10, but you have a resting order for -20 that's "reduce only". you'd expect us to cancel that order (or decrease it?)
the matching engine has no concept of buy no being different from sell yes. that's just a cosmetic field for the frontend. separately, there is still the reduce only flag in the v2 order create. expressiveness from v1 hasn't changed. but reduce only is a little bit strange, because it's only used when the order is aggressing. like what would you expect if you're +30, you place an order for -20. then, you place a new order for -20 that fills. so now you're +10, but you have a resting order for -20 that's "reduce only". you'd expect us to cancel that order (or decrease it?)