Products and Product APIs - Missing “price_increment” Property

The following two Advanced Trade API pages for Products/Product:

Do not list the following Product property:


The above property must have been added in the past few days.

In April, I reported that the following property was not listed in the API documentation - and it is still not listed:


In January, I reported that the following property was not listed in the API documentation - and it is still not listed:



Hi @mantheakis thank you for reaching out! For the properties that you have mentioned above, we will look into it and let you know about the same. We appreciate all the feedback. Keep in touch.

I reached out to our team regarding the feedback you shared. Would it be possible for you to describe your use cases along with some sceenshots or if needed a screen-recording. Do not forget to hide any sensitive info in case you decide to share a screen recording.

I am developing a Java application and using FasterXML Jackson libraries to convert JSON content into Java objects.

All I have to do is make sure the Java class files declare attributes whose names and data-types can be mapped to the relevant JSON properties. (This contract works both ways - I can also pass Java object instances to Jackson, for it to hand me back a correctly formatted JSON string.)

However, if a Java class file does not declare an attribute that matches a property in the JSON content, the conversion process fails - an exception is thrown.

I can configure Jackson to ignore missing properties/attributes, so that it does not crash, and I will probably use this option when the project goes live - but it seems wrong that you guys are modifying endpoint APIs without notifying users, and without documenting those changes.

Notifying users could be as simple as posting a message on the forum.

Updating the website documentation should not be a big deal either.

At present, there seems to be a disconnect between your endpoint developers and your fiduciary duty towards users.

Thank you for responding and sharing the use case with us. Currently these attributes are not officially supported and hence there is no documentation for them. These attributes are not intended to use right now. We would request to ignore these for now. Please share your feedbacks regarding Advanced trade documentation/API or any other issues here on the forum anytime. I hope this helps.

@mantheakis @Loop_11 Can you confirm that the ListProducts API return a list, the documentation states as much but the 200 response does not reflect it:
“products”: {
“product_id”: “BTC-USD”,
“price”: “140.21”,

Instead of:
“products”: [
“product_id”: “BTC-USD”,
“price”: “140.21”,

I was silly enough to copy-paste the response directly in my tests, it seems to be everywhere

@mantheakis, @Loop_11 Similarly:
“trading_disabled”: “boolean”,
trading_disabled boolean required

Can you confirm that the ListProducts API return a list …

Yes, it does return a list. I use it regularly.

Perhaps you are calling the wrong endpoint?

The endpoint documented here only returns details for a SINGLE product:

For a LIST of products you need to use the following endpoint:

The URL difference is subtle: getproducts instead of getproduct.

Thanks for the quick reply. and confirmation. I suspected that much, but without Sandbox I have not tested it. I used a copy-paste of the 200 Response for testing, without paying attention, from the multi-language testing area.
Do you know if there is a limit to the number of products returned and what is the default number? The testing area says 100, but … fooled me once

You do not need Sandbox to test (and use) either of these two GET endpoints: they just return data, and it is up to you what you do with that information - it will not cost you anything.

The only endpoints that can ‘cost’ you are the POST endpoints.

I counted 475 products, just now. I think you can set whatever limit you want, but then you have to gauge the offset as well.

Great, thank you for the answer.
Right, I meant that I prefer not to use a live account during test phase, but fair point, it would not cost, I actually did not think of that (silly me).