Interactive Brokers contract resolution

[avhz]

Hi all :)

Ran into an issue yesterday (possibly after upgrading from v1.225 to v1.226) when loading Interactive Brokers instrument IDs.

Before:

2026-05-11T13:04:43.893682000Z [INFO] TRADER-001.InteractiveBrokersInstrumentProvider: Contract qualified for META.NASDAQ with ConId=107113386
2026-05-11T13:04:43.893935000Z [INFO] TRADER-001.InteractiveBrokersInstrumentProvider: Adding instrument=Equity(id=META.NASDAQ, raw_symbol=META, ...

After:

2026-05-11T13:36:54.193854000Z [INFO] TRADER-001.InteractiveBrokersInstrumentProvider: Contract qualified for META.NASDAQ with ConId=107113386
2026-05-11T13:36:54.194200000Z [INFO] TRADER-001.InteractiveBrokersInstrumentProvider: Adding instrument=Equity(id=META.ARCA, raw_symbol=META, ...

The later run comes back with META.ARCA, rather than META.NASDAQ, so subsequent orders placed for META.NASDAQ are denied:

2026-05-11T13:37:10.663914000Z [WARN] TRADER-001.MyStrategy: <--[EVT] OrderDenied(instrument_id=META.NASDAQ, client_order_id=O-20260511-133710-123-000-2, reason='Instrument for META.NASDAQ not found')

with the reason 'Instrument for META.NASDAQ not found'.

Just wondering if there were any changes in v1.226 that might've affected this?

Cheers !

Edit: it seems that one situation that I can reproduce where this occurs is if there is an existing position that was filled at a specific venue different to the primary exchange (in this case ARCA vs NASDAQ). I tested it manually with an order outside RTH which was filled at IBEOS and I get the same issue.

This returns None:

instr = self.cache.instrument(InstrumentId.from_str("META.NASDAQ"))

This returns the instrument:

instr = self.cache.instrument(InstrumentId.from_str("META.IBEOS"))

However this is tricky because I am handling contracts via their primary exchange, not by their filled exchanges in the event of prior trades.

i.e. If I trade a contract that fills on a non-primary exchange, I still want to be able to place orders for that contract without tracking where it eventually gets filled.

[faysou]

Thanks, I've done a PR to fix this. Your post should be an issue rather than a discussion.

[avhz]

Thanks @faysou appreciate the quick fix ! Wasn't sure if it was on my end or not.

Will this address these errors that I am getting too ?

[ERROR] TESTER-001.InteractiveBrokersClient-193: This order will be directly routed to NASDAQ. Direct routed orders may result in higher trade fees. Restriction is specified in Precautionary Settings of Global Configuration/API. (code: 10311, req_id=101)

Edit:
To further clarify, this warning/error is due to a gateway setting "Bypass Redirect Order warning for API orders".
If this is active, and the order gets directly routed rather than SMART routed, it sits waiting for manual transmission to IB, rather than immediate submission.

[faysou]

fyi, I'm working on a PR to override the IB exchange implied by the venue of an instrument #4079

[avhz]

Would this accept { "exchange": "SMART" }, or is it otherwise possible to use SMART as the default for all my equities, or more generally just enforce SMART routing at all times?

e.g.

InstrumentId.from_str("AAPL.SMART")

Would make venue handling simpler for strategies covering multiple US stocks with different primary exchanges (including backtesting, since if I load my instruments as I would live, then I need to add multiple venues to the backtest engine to accommodate them, each with their own balance, or retag the instrument exchanges to some arbitrary backtest value, e.g. SIM, INTERACTIVE-BROKERS, etc).

[faysou]

I would rather use AAPL.ARCX or whichever venue is used by databento for compatibility purpose with historical data. I don't know if exchange equal to SMART would work, you can try on a demo account.

[avhz]

Even if we need to use a specific MIC or IB exchange name like XNAS or NASDAQ for contract qualification, is it possible to submit an order specifically with SMART routing?