Why the VPS did not fix the slippage
Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2026 8:57 pm
A common move: slippage hurts, so a VPS gets rented, and nothing improves. The reason is that latency to the broker is only one piece of the puzzle.
Slippage comes from price moving between order and fill, and the broker's own processing, liquidity provider response, and last look all contribute. A VPS shaves network time but cannot change those.
In some cases the VPS makes things look better because pings drop from 80 to 2 milliseconds. Yet fills still slip, since most of the delay was elsewhere.
A good approach is breaking down the total time: network, server processing, and liquidity response. The platform journal shows only the total, so comparisons across brokers help isolate the part that belongs to the broker.
If most of the delay sits on the broker side, only a different broker or account type can solve it.
Did a VPS make any difference to fills, and how was the improvement measured?
Slippage comes from price moving between order and fill, and the broker's own processing, liquidity provider response, and last look all contribute. A VPS shaves network time but cannot change those.
In some cases the VPS makes things look better because pings drop from 80 to 2 milliseconds. Yet fills still slip, since most of the delay was elsewhere.
A good approach is breaking down the total time: network, server processing, and liquidity response. The platform journal shows only the total, so comparisons across brokers help isolate the part that belongs to the broker.
If most of the delay sits on the broker side, only a different broker or account type can solve it.
Did a VPS make any difference to fills, and how was the improvement measured?