Algorithmic Execution: Stop Giving Away Free Money
🎯 What You'll Learn
By the end of this lesson, you'll be able to:
- Algo execution: TWAP (time-weighted), VWAP (volume-weighted), POV (% of volume)
- TWAP spreads orders evenly over time
- VWAP matches market volume profile
- Framework: Detect algo patterns (even volume distribution) → Front-run TWAP → Fade end of algo
⚡ Quick Wins for Tomorrow (Click to expand)
Don't overwhelm yourself. Start with these 3 actions:
- Calculate your actual slippage cost tonight (15-minute audit that will shock you) — Open your last 20 trades in your brokerage account or trade journal. For each trade, record: (1) Your intended entry price (where you clicked "buy"), (2) Your actual fill price (what you got), (3) The difference (fill - intended = slippage). Example: Trade 1: Intended $520.00, filled $520.15 = +$0.15 slippage (you paid 15 cents more). Do this for all 20 trades. Then calculate: (A) Average slippage per trade, (B) Total slippage cost (sum all differences × shares), (C) Slippage as % of gross profit. Sarah's wake-up call: 20 trades, avg slippage $0.12 per share, 100 shares per trade = $240 total slip page. Her gross profit was $1,200, so slippage ate 20% of her edge. On 380 trades/year, that's $4,560 lost to execution costs. Why this works: You can't improve what you don't measure. Once you see "$4,500/year lost to bad execution," you'll be OBSESSED with minimizing slippage. This 15-minute audit creates undeniable proof that execution matters. Action: Complete this audit tonight. If your slippage is >0.1% per trade (or >10% of gross profit), you have a serious execution problem costing you thousands annually.
- Switch from market orders to limit orders for your next 10 trades (instant 0.05-0.15% savings) — Starting tomorrow, make one simple rule change: NO MORE MARKET ORDERS (except emergencies). Instead, use limit orders with this framework: (1) For entries: Place limit order at current bid (if buying) or current ask (if selling). If not filled in 30 seconds, move limit up by 1 tick. Repeat until filled. (2) For exits: Same process. Limit at bid/ask, adjust if needed. (3) For stop losses: Use stop-limit orders (not stop-market) with limit 2-3 ticks below your stop to avoid catastrophic slippage. Example: SPY trading $520.00 bid / $520.02 ask. You want to buy. OLD WAY (market order): Click buy, get filled at $520.03-$520.05 (slippage). NEW WAY (limit order): Place buy limit $520.00 (at bid). Wait 30 seconds. If not filled, adjust to $520.01. Filled at $520.01. Saved $0.02-$0.04 per share. On 100 shares × 10 trades = $20-$40 saved. Over 200 trades/year = $400-$800 saved. Why this works: Market orders give you instant fills but terrible prices. Limit orders give you price control. Yes, you might miss 5-10% of trades (no fill), but you save 0.05-0.15% on the 90% you do get. Net result: 8-12% annual performance boost. Action: For your next 10 trades, use ONLY limit orders. Track: "Trades attempted [__], Trades filled [__], Average slippage [__]." Compare to your market order slippage from the audit. You'll see immediate savings.
- Avoid high-slippage time windows and track the savings (protects 10-15% of trades) — Create a "No-Trade Zone" rule for these time periods: (1) Market open: 9:30-9:45 AM (first 15 minutes = widest spreads, highest volatility, worst fills), (2) Lunch: 12:00-1:30 PM (low volume = wider spreads), (3) Market close: 3:45-4:00 PM (last 15 minutes = wild swings, unpredictable fills). Why these windows kill you: 9:30-9:45 AM: Spread on SPY is 2-5 cents (vs 1 cent normal). On 100 shares, that's $2-$5 extra cost per trade. 12:00-1:30 PM: Volume drops 40%, spread widens 50-100%. Algo traders dominate, you get bad fills. 3:45-4:00 PM: Spread explodes to 3-8 cents as institutions rebalance. Example: Sarah used to trade at 9:35 AM (loves "the open"). Average slippage: $0.18/share. She switched to waiting until 9:50 AM. New average slippage: $0.06/share. Saved $0.12/share × 100 shares × 50 trades/year = $600/year. Action: For the next 2 weeks, implement "No-Trade Zones." Journal every time you're tempted to trade during these windows. Note: "Wanted to trade at 9:35 AM, waited until 9:50 AM. Entry: $520.10 (vs $520.22 if I traded at open). Saved: $0.12/share." After 10 examples, you'll have proof that patience saves money. Bonus: Track your win rate during these windows vs normal hours. You'll likely find 10-20% lower win rates too (double penalty).
You have a 70% expectancy, 3R average. Traders often be crushing it.
But your account is barely up 10%. What gives?
Execution. You're bleeding 0.15% per trade on slippage and spread costs. Over 200 trades? That's 30% of your returns, gone.
🚨 Real Talk
How a trader enters matters as much as what a trader enters. Market orders = instant gratification + instant slippage. Limit orders = patience + better fills. The difference? 10-20% annual returns.
🎯 What You'll Gain
After this lesson, you'll be able to:
- Use limit orders, stop-limits, and iceberg orders to minimize slippage
- Scale into positions for better average entry prices
- Avoid high-slippage time windows (9:30-9:45 AM, 3:45-4:00 PM)
- Calculate and track your effective spread cost
💡 The Aha Moment
Execution IS edge. Save 0.1% per trade → 10% annually on 100 trades → Compounds to 60%+ over 5 years. Most traders focus on setups. Winners focus on execution.
Sarah's $18,560 Execution Wake-Up Call
Trader: Sarah Martinez, 29, day trader from Miami, FL
Timeframe: Q1-Q4 2024 (12 months)
Account Size: $85,000
Trading Volume: ~380 trades/year
Problem: Profitable strategy, but slippage was destroying 22% of potential returns
⚠️ The Before: Execution Ignorance (Q1 2024)
Sarah had a solid 65% win rate and +2.4R average on her setups. On paper, she should've made $42,300 in Q1. Instead, she made only $29,180. Where did the other $13,120 go? Execution costs.
Phase 1: The Slippage Audit (April 2024)
After a frustrating Q1 where her account didn't match her journal's expected performance, Sarah's trading mentor suggested conducting a slippage audit. She analyzed her last 90 trades in detail:
| Execution Method | Trades | Avg Slippage | Cost Per Trade | Q1 Total Cost | Issue |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Market Orders (Entry) | 78 | 0.18% | -$76 | -$5,928 | Instant gratification, paid the spread |
| Market Orders (Exit) | 90 | 0.14% | -$59 | -$5,310 | Panic potential exits, bad fills |
| First 15 Min Trading | 22 | 0.31% | -$131 | -$2,882 | Wide spreads, volatility |
| Commissions | 90 | — | -$1.30 | -$117 | $0.65 per side |
| TOTAL EXECUTION COSTS (Q1): | -$14,237 | — | |||
| Expected P&L (based on journal): | $43,417 | — | |||
| Actual P&L (after execution): | $29,180 | — | |||
| Execution Destroyed: | 32.8% | of potential profit! | |||
🚨 The Shocking Discovery
Sarah's execution costs in Q1: -$14,237
- Market order entries: -$5,928 (avg 0.18% slippage)
- Market order potential exits: -$5,310 (avg 0.14% slippage)
- First 15-min trading: -$2,882 (avg 0.31% slippage from wide spreads)
- Commissions: -$117
Translation: Sarah had a profitable strategy that should've made $43,417 in Q1, but poor execution destroyed 32.8% of those returns. She was giving away $14,237 in Q1 alone—projected to $56,948 annually!
Phase 2: Execution Optimization (Q2-Q4 2024)
Shocked by the audit results, Sarah implemented a comprehensive execution improvement plan in May:
🔄 Sarah's Execution Optimization Strategy
- Switched to limit orders for all entries (join the bid/ask, don't cross it)
- Eliminated trading in first 15 minutes of market open (wait for spreads to tighten)
- Scaled into larger positions (2-3 tranches instead of all-at-once)
- Used stop-limit orders instead of stop-market (avoid cascading stop losses)
- Switched to IBKR Lite for commission-free trading on liquid stocks
- Tracked slippage metrics for every trade in her journal
| Period | Trades | Avg Entry Slippage | Avg Exit Slippage | Total Exec Cost | Expected P&L | Actual P&L | Execution Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Q1 2024 (Before) | 90 | 0.18% | 0.14% | -$14,237 | $43,417 | $29,180 | -32.8% |
| Q2 2024 (Optimized) | 96 | 0.04% | 0.03% | -$3,072 | $45,880 | $42,808 | -6.7% |
| Q3 2024 (Optimized) | 101 | 0.03% | 0.02% | -$2,525 | $48,120 | $45,595 | -5.2% |
| Q4 2024 (Optimized) | 93 | 0.03% | 0.03% | -$2,790 | $44,360 | $41,570 | -6.3% |
| FULL YEAR 2024 | 380 | 0.07% | 0.06% | -$22,624 | $181,777 | $159,153 | -12.4% |
🎯 Before vs. After: Execution Optimization Results
| Metric | Q1 2024 (Bad Execution) | Q2-Q4 2024 (Optimized) | Improvement |
|---|---|---|---|
| Avg Entry Slippage | 0.18% | 0.03% | -83% (0.15% saved) |
| Avg Exit Slippage | 0.14% | 0.03% | -79% (0.11% saved) |
| Total Slippage per Round-Trip | 0.32% | 0.06% | -81% (0.26% saved) |
| Q1 Execution Cost | -$14,237 | — | — |
| Q2-Q4 Avg Quarterly Cost | — | -$2,796 | -80% reduction |
| Quarterly Savings vs. Q1 | — | +$11,441 | +$34,323/year |
Result: By switching to limit orders, avoiding the first 15 minutes, and scaling entries, Sarah saved an average of $11,441 per quarter compared to her Q1 execution costs. Over 3 quarters (Q2-Q4), that's $34,323 in additional profit from better execution alone—with zero changes to her actual trading strategy!
You're now at the halfway point. You've learned the key strategies.
Great progress! Take a quick stretch break if needed, then we'll dive into the advanced concepts ahead.
Full Year Impact
| Scenario | Expected Returns (Journal) |
Execution Costs | Actual Returns | Account Growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| If Q1 execution continued all year | $181,777 | -$56,948 (32.8% avg) |
$124,829 | +146.9% |
| Actual 2024 (optimized Q2-Q4) | $181,777 | -$22,624 (12.4% avg) |
$159,153 | +187.2% |
| Improvement from Execution Optimization | — | +$34,324 | +$34,324 | +40.3% |
🏆 The Bottom Line: Execution is Edge
Starting Capital: $85,000 (January 1, 2024)
Ending Capital: $244,153 (December 31, 2024)
Total Return: +$159,153 (+187.2% full year)
Execution Optimization Value: +$34,324 saved in Q2-Q4
What if Sarah had continued Q1 execution all year?
- Expected returns (journal): $181,777
- Projected execution cost at Q1 rate: -$56,948
- Projected actual returns: $124,829 (+146.9%)
- Actual with optimization: $159,153 (+187.2%)
- Execution value: +$34,324 (27.5% boost to returns!)
The lesson? Sarah had a profitable strategy all along, but poor execution was destroying 33% of her potential returns. By spending 2 hours learning about limit orders, scaling entries, and timing optimization, she added $34,324 to her annual profit—a 27.5% boost with ZERO changes to her actual trading decisions. That's a $17,162/hour rate of return for learning execution basics.
Sarah's advice to other traders: "Track your slippage for 20 trades. Calculate the annual cost. Then ask yourself: Is saving 0.2% per trade worth 2 hours of learning? For me, it was the most profitable 2 hours of 2024."
🎓 Key Takeaways
- Slippage costs 0.1-0.5% per trade: Over 100 trades, that's 10-50% of returns lost
- Market orders = instant gratification: Limit orders = better fills (patience saves money)
- Scale into positions: Split large orders into 2-3 tranches for better average price
- Avoid high-slippage times: First/last 15 minutes of session = widest spreads
- Use iceberg orders for size: Don't show your full hand on the order book
- Track effective spread cost: Measure (fill price - mid price) / mid price for every trade
🎯 Practice Exercise: Optimize Execution Timing and Reduce Slippage
Objective: Quantify your current execution costs and implement strategies to reduce slippage by 30-50%.
Part 1: Slippage Audit (Last 20 Trades)
Calculate your effective slippage for recent trades:
| Trade | Mid Price at Signal | Fill Price | Slippage | % Impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | $520.00 | $520.15 | +$0.15 | +0.03% |
| ...audit 20 trades... | ||||
Summary:
Average Slippage per Trade: ____%
Total Slippage Cost (20 trades): $______
Annualized Cost (100 trades): $______
Worst Offenders (identify patterns):
- Trades during 9:30-9:45 AM: Avg slippage ____%
- Trades during 3:45-4:00 PM: Avg slippage ____%
- Market orders: Avg slippage ____%
- Limit orders: Avg slippage ____%
Part 2: Market Order vs Limit Order A/B Test
For next 10 trades, alternate between market and limit orders. Compare execution quality:
Trade 1 (Market Order):
Signal: Long at $520.00 (mid price)
Fill: $520.25 (slippage: +$0.25 / +0.05%)
Trade 2 (Limit Order at bid/ask):
Signal: Long at $520.00 (mid price)
Limit: $520.10 (at ask)
Fill: $520.10 (slippage: +$0.10 / +0.02%)
[Repeat for 10 trades]
Results:
Market Orders (5 trades): Avg slippage ____%
Limit Orders (5 trades): Avg slippage ____%
Savings with Limits: ____% per trade
Part 3: Scaling In Strategy Implementation
Instead of entering full position at once, split into 2-3 tranches. Test on 5 trades:
Example Setup:
Signal: Long SPY, target position 100 shares
Strategy: Scale in 50 / 30 / 20 shares
Entry 1: 50 shares at $520.10 (immediate)
Entry 2: 30 shares at $519.90 (dip, limit order)
Entry 3: 20 shares at $519.70 (deeper dip, limit order)
Average Price: $519.98 (vs $520.10 all-at-once)
Savings: $0.12/share = $12 on 100 shares (0.023%)
YOUR SCALED ENTRIES (track 5 trades):
Trade 1:
Tranche 1: ___ shares @ $_____
Tranche 2: ___ shares @ $_____
Tranche 3: ___ shares @ $_____
Average Price: $_____
vs Immediate Fill: $_____ (savings: $___/share)
Success Rate: ___ / 5 trades filled completely
Part 4: High-Slippage Time Windows Analysis
Track spreads and slippage during different times of day:
| Time Window | Avg Spread | Avg Slippage | Trade or Avoid? |
|---|---|---|---|
| 9:30-9:45 AM | $___ | ____% | Avoid (unless A+ setup) |
| 10:00-11:30 AM | $___ | ____% | Best window (liquid) |
| 12:00-2:00 PM | $___ | ____% | Lunch (lower liquidity) |
| 2:00-3:30 PM | $___ | ____% | Good window |
| 3:45-4:00 PM | $___ | ____% | Avoid (widest spreads) |
Execution Rule: Avoid first and last 15 minutes unless setup is exceptional. Your slippage cost will drop 30-40% just from this timing filter.
Part 5: Advanced Order Types Experiment
Test stop-limit orders instead of stop-market orders (avoid cascading stop losses):
Scenario: Long SPY at $520, stop at $518
Old Way (Stop-Market):
Stop triggers at $518.00
Fills at $517.60 (slipped -$0.40 in cascade)
New Way (Stop-Limit):
Stop triggers at $518.00
Limit at $517.80 (max acceptable)
Fills at $517.85 (slippage -$0.15 only)
Savings: $0.25/share
Test on 5 stop-outs:
Stop 1: Market fill $_____ vs Limit fill $_____ (savings: $___)
[repeat]
Average Savings per Example stop: $_____/share
Implementation Goal: Implement these execution improvements over 30 days. Track slippage before/after. Example target: Reduce slippage by 30-50%. On 100 trades/year, this adds 3-5% to annual returns. Execution is edge—now you're capturing it instead of bleeding it.
You just learned what hedge funds pay millions for: execution algorithms. Scale in, use limits, avoid predictable times. Small edges compound. This alone will add 10-15% to your annual returns.
Related Lessons
Institutional Order Flow
Learn how institutions execute large orders efficiently—apply their techniques.
Read Lesson →Professional Operations
Build execution checklists and operational workflows.
Read Lesson →System Development
Automate execution algorithms for consistent optimal fills.
Read Lesson →⏭️ Coming Up Next
Article #34: System Development — Discretionary trading scales to one person. Systematic trading scales forever. Learn to codify your edge and build automated systems.
💬 Discussion (0 comments)
Loading comments...