IMPORTANT: API operation credit prices updated

Dear All,

Due to an oversight every API operation had the same “base price” of 1 credit. For example operations like getting statistics cost 1 credit, the same as a backtest which is much more resource intensive.

The API operation prices have been updated and you can see them here: API Credits . These changes are in effect now. The changes are highlighted below: all the numbers greater than 1 in the “Iteration Base” table.

You can get more API credits by upgrading your membership or buying them as add-ons in Account Settings→DataMiner & API. Note that API credits addons never expire: we first subtract from the monthly credits of your membership, then from your add-ons.

Sorry about this. If your data mining needs require many more credits contact us to discuss a plan. Thank You

The documentation states that a DataMiner call to /rank/performance is more expensive, yet the cost for the API is now the same: 3 credits. Why is that so?

Rank performance data for a date range. DataMiner: 3 credits per bucket. API: 3 credits. The DataMiner cost is higher because it runs a Screen backtest for each bucket which allows it to return many useful statistics. The API version returns only the performance of each bucket and the benchmark.

Dataminer runs a backtest for each bucket. It is the only way at the moment to collect the extra stats that are presented.

But I don’t use DataMiner. I use the API directly, and am now charged 3 credits per /rank/performance call – same as DataMiner.

It’s the DataMiner RankPerfOperation code that calls a screen backtest per bucket. I’m not doing this in my code.

The DataMiner RankPerformance is not the same as the API RankPerformance endpoint. The DM operation uses the API endpoint, and it costs is proportional to the # of buckets ( a 5 bucket DM RankPerformance costs 15 credits).

It’s an unfortunate naming choice.

I edited the doc to be more clear.

Ok, thank you for clarifying. It’s disappointing the costs are going up, but I understand.

Maybe to soften the blow of the increased credit costs, could you please consider allowing the monthly credit allocations to rollover for up to 6 or 12 months? Sometimes I’m not quite ready at the end of the month to run a new batch of jobs, but I will rush to get them in to avoid losing my monthly allocation. It would be nice to have even a few months of rollover to allow for some more flexibility of scheduling around users’ busy lives. To be clear, I have bought extra API credits in the past and will continue to do so going forward, but a rollover option would really be kindly appreciated.

Thank you,

I understand why, but: Still happy about the API overall though!

ouch… although I understand the differences. a gentle request would be that something like an API rank_update call which has to be extremely low weight cost less than 1 credit.

Marco, any consideration to allowing credits to rollover for N months?

We’re at the end of the month and busy life has prevented me from thoughtfully using all of my monthly allocation from August. I hate to throw together some rushed jobs just to not let these go to waste now that I effectively have 50% fewer monthly API credits. This would be a nice concession, especially considering that I had 300,000 purchased credits that were devalued overnight without warning – I’d been saving them for Europe/Canada jobs.


1 Like

API was ( is ) a lot of work…

Without any comment necessary: I hope that work is paying off for you and P123. .

1 Like