Choose Chicago, NYC, or London by comparing the routes to your actual broker and data-feed endpoints, then checking remote desktop access from your own connection. There is no reliable rule that assigns the best VPS city from “futures,” “forex,” or “stocks” alone.
A broker’s headquarters, the location of its website, and the endpoint serving your trading account can be different places.
Compare two paths#
VPS to trading service: This carries the platform’s data and order-related traffic. Ask the broker or connection provider which endpoint applies to your account, including whether market data and order entry use different services.
Your device to VPS: This carries the remote desktop session. It affects the delay between your input and what you see on screen. Microsoft distinguishes remote-session traffic from back-end application traffic in its Remote Desktop performance guidance.
For a manually controlled desktop, both paths affect the experience. For software acting on the VPS without a remote click, the device connection is outside that particular action’s path, although you still need usable access to supervise it.
When to include each city in a comparison#
| Location | Reason to test it | Assumption to avoid |
|---|---|---|
| Chicago | Your connection provider identifies a relevant endpoint in the region, or a comparison shows a suitable route | Every futures connection goes directly to a Chicago matching engine |
| NYC | Your account uses a service in the New York area, or measured routes make it a candidate | A broker’s New York office identifies its trading server |
| London | Your service endpoints or device-to-VPS tests make it a candidate | Every forex account uses a London server |
CME’s Aurora facility is one specific reason the Chicago area appears in futures discussions. It is not a location rule for all broker connections; the CME geography guide explains the distinction and announced infrastructure changes.
Make a fair location comparison#
Use equivalent server plans and the same endpoint, test method, and representative time windows. Record the resolved destination address: if two locations reach different servers behind one hostname, you are comparing the service’s routing choices as well as distance.
Compare the spread of results and repeated timeouts alongside the average. A single best ping reply is weak evidence. The latency test guide explains how to collect and interpret the measurements.
Then open the same desktop workspace from the connection you normally use. Check typing, chart interaction, and window changes. Keep display settings comparable; remote desktop performance also depends on server resources and the display workload, not just geographic distance.
When the results disagree#
If one city reaches the broker more quickly but makes manual desktop control awkward, choose according to the task you actually perform. If the broker and data feed favor different regions, establish which connection is responsible for the delay you are trying to reduce.
When differences are small or inconsistent, retain that uncertainty. Support, available resources, and the ability to change regions may be more useful deciding factors than a ranking built from one sample. None of these measurements establishes order execution quality.
Compare available trading server locations and plans after identifying the endpoints and remote access path you need.