Slashdot Mirror


House Calls For Hearing On Stock Market "Glitch"

Lucas123 writes "The House Financial Services securities subcommittee plans to hold a hearing next Tuesday to examine what caused the US stock market to plunge almost 1,000 points in a half hour Thursday, and it called on the SEC to investigate possible problems with computer algorithms that may have exacerbated a human order-entry error and led to the precipitous drop. 'Reports have surfaced that much of this movement was potentially as a result of a computer glitch,' Committee Chairman Kanjorski said. 'We cannot allow a technological error to spook the markets and cause panic. This is unacceptable. In this day and age and with the use of such complex technology, we should be able to make sure that our financial markets are effectively monitored and investors are protected.'"

22 of 180 comments (clear)

  1. Its strange. by drolli · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I mean.. they *have* the logs, i hope. I mean they *have* some software anyway which does data-mining to analyze for unusual things....

  2. Well... by boliboboli · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It doesn't take a subcommittee hearing to figure out that people are finicky and the system is remarkably fragile.

    1. Re:Well... by hemlock00 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Are you suggesting we shouldn't have a hearing for it? Not really sure the benefit of *not* having a hearing would be. At the most, it draws more attention to the fragile system, and there would be a possibility of something being done about it. At the least, it would officially destroy the idiotic excuse that "someone hit b instead of m" story that some media has been circulating.

    2. Re:Well... by Agarax · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are you suggesting we shouldn't have a hearing for it?

      All hearings are these days is a convoluted way for politicos to take cheap shots at someone to boost their popularity at home.

      --
      Remember folks, slashdot doesn't have a -1 "disagree" moderation!
    3. Re:Well... by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

      I can see a trader missing two prompts in a row if they've snorted enough coke.

      I used to work in the building that houses the Mercantile Exchange here in Chicago, and the traders on the floor seemed to be a pretty high-flying group, if you get my meaning.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  3. Do you want to make this multi-billion $ trade? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Cancel or Allow?

  4. What glitch? by AHuxley · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The world got to see the reality for a short time and then went back to sleep
    http://www.zerohedge.com/article/day-market-almost-died-courtesy-high-frequency-trading
    http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&tkr=C%3AUS&sid=agW5_B0D1z9M
    "CME Group Statement on Today's Market Activity:"
    "does not appear to be irregular or unusual in light of market activity today"

    --
    Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
    1. Re:What glitch? by AnonymousClown · · Score: 5, Interesting
      From top liink:

      After today investors will have little if any faith left in the US stocks, assuming they had any to begin with.

      During the GM bankruptcy, I saw their common stock was still being traded on the pink sheets. That's when I realized that many traders have shit for brains.

      When a company goes bankrupt, their equity gets wiped out. In other words, the traders were trading worthless pieces of paper. My father in law almost bought some thinking it was a great deal. I clued him into the idiocy.

      --
      RIP America

      July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

    2. Re:What glitch? by khallow · · Score: 3, Informative

      During the GM bankruptcy, I saw their common stock was still being traded on the pink sheets. That's when I realized that many traders have shit for brains.

      Bankruptcy does not always wipe out equity in Chapter 11 cases. Some people bet that the bad news isn't as bad as thought. Having said that, I went through a phase where I bet on bankrupt and near bankrupt companies with rather poor success. The thing I figured out later is that at very low share prices, a little too much optimism can pump up a stock quite a bit. So I was almost always paying a hidden premium on these companies even though they were near bankruptcy.

    3. Re:What glitch? by ph1ll · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Agreed. A friend of mine who is a lawyer for a well-known investment management firm was amazed when their traders were doing business with Lehman the day after it filed for bankruptcy.

      When he asked them what the hell they were doing trading with a bankrupt, they told him "but the prices on the screen are amazing!"

      He had to explain to them that the prices were amazing because they were unlikely to see the transaction completed by their counterparty. "Have you not been reading the papers?" he asked, exasperated. But all they could do was stare at the trading screen.

      They just didn't get it. That's the thing about these so-called Masters of the Universe - they're not the best and the brightest despite what they think.

      My friend then had to spend the next 36 hours working non-stop to close the positions his traders had taken as best he could. The really astonishing thing was that his boss reprimanded him for not explicitly telling the traders earlier not to trade with Lehman.

      --
      --- "We've always been at war with Eastasia."
  5. Protection... by noodler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "This is unacceptable. In this day and age and with the use of such complex technology, we should be able to make sure that our financial markets are effectively monitored and investors are protected." ... because protectig investors is more important than protecting the economy.

    1. Re:Protection... by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What do you think the economy is made up of? Investors aren't just the evil 'banker' - anyone holding a pension or a savings account is also an investor.

  6. The plunge (partly) explained by dollarwizard · · Score: 3, Informative

    WSJ is reporting that the trigger was a very large sell order for P&G coupled with unchecked computer trading and some inherent flaws in the current system of fragmented exchanges.

    Felix Salmon also did a good explanatory post that pulled in work from other writers about what might have happened and why.

    Mr. Salmon's post links to a thought provoking post by a blogger named Kid Dynamite, who posits that it's a really bad precedent to cancel the erroneous trades because it lets the program traders off the hook for the consequences of their computer mess-up.

  7. cancelled orders more than 60% off by joostje · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So NASDAQ cancelled all trades the more 60% off of the stock's price.

    Who decides that? And what happens to a smart invester that buys stock at $0.01 that usually trades at $40, to quickly later sell it at $30? Will the $0.01 buys be cancelled, but the $30 sells not be cancelled? But that would leave you with a short position, having to buy them back at $40. May be very expensive.

  8. Who made the money? by hairytomato · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Follow the money. SOMEONE made money, it sure as hell wasn't me.....

  9. Re:Suggestion by vbraga · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm pretty sure Brazil imported this idea from somewhere else and I strongly belive this place is the US. I just don't know if 1000 points were enough to trigger it. Also, it closes the market for half or an hour for the first it's hit. If it's hit again it closes for more, until it reaches the end of day.

    Found it.

    If the Dow falls 1100 points before 2 p.m. we would see a one-hour trading halt.

    If between 2-2:30 p.m., there is a 30-minute trading halt.

    3 p.m. or later, there is no trading halt.

    source.

    --
    English is not my first language. Corrections and suggestions are welcome.
  10. Re:Big Bank Conspiracy by causality · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is it mere coincidence that the Senate planned for a vote to break up the big banks on the same day?

    "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happened, you can bet it was planned that way."
    -- Franklin D. Roosevelt

    --
    It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
  11. Re:Suggestion by boombaard · · Score: 3, Informative
    See here

    Wow, we are sinking to new levels of idiocy now.
    The MSM would have you believe that the tremendous sell-off in the markets was just a trading error. If it was a trading error, then these markets SUCK! Are you telling me we put TRILLIONS of dollars, including our retirement savings, into a system that can be completely thrown into chaos because a single guy hits the wrong button on a single transaction? It’s a good thing Faisal Shahzad isn’t still working on Wall Street anymore, or he could have just pushed a button and caused a lot more damage that way than he did with a faulty car bomb
    This is financial terrorism, folks, retail traders were stopped out and margined out while the pros made Billions picking up the pieces. Don’t worry though, if you are rich enough and connected enough, the Nasdaq will reverse your losses but if they really wanted to make amends, they would cancel the day’s trading for ALL traders.
    This market didn’t just sell off because of a trading mistake. Whatever really happened, it happened because there were no real buyers when the selling came - something I have been warning would happen during the last 3 months of low-volume run-ups. I keep using the house of cards/Jenga metaphor and that’s exactly what we have so be very careful when the same idiots who have been telling you BUYBUYBUY are now telling you to "come back in - the water’s fine."

    and here:

    Having seen the capitulation unfold second by second and then listen to CNBC come up with every excuse under the sun just got under my skin. I've decided to chart some of our one second analytics charts of the capitulation unfolding on our screens. The chart below (more to follow) captures the moment of the final capitulation, before the reversal today. The idea that it was a 'fat finger' error is ludicrous; unless the fat finger hit every market in the world virtually simultaneously. Liquidity simply left the world financial markets for about four minutes this afternoon. The bids just vanished. And what else vanished? Remember the vaunted supplemental liquidity providers, led by Goldman Sachs. Remember that they are paid to "provide liquidity" through their predatory high-frequency algos, they are not required to do so. So when the S@#$T hit the fan they just disappeared. In one second more or less someone (and yes, under these circumstances, human beings take control of the machines) made the decision to pull the bids on every equity in the S&P, every financial futures contract, every FX contract in every market in the world. This kind of thing just doesn't happen in a pure auction environment; there just isn't a tight enough communication link between the parties to allow the decisions to propagate within the same second -- even with HFT algorithms. No. Some human made the decision to pull the bids; all of them, all at once. If that is not a condemnation of the concentration of financial power and the systematic risk it engenders I don't know what is.

  12. Re:Yeah, yeah, yeah .... by nschubach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's something for the politicians to do to continue painting a big red X on Wall Street so they can take it over and control it themselves. I'm beginning to think Congress' job is to take over things and run them in a constant state of deficient funds.

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  13. To whoever can help me understand this by ericlondaits · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Perhaps someone who knows more about stock trading can help me understand:

    1) TFA states that someone made an input mistake and sold 16 billon Fortune 500 stocks instead of 16 millon. Did he have that many to sell? How big a player do you have to be to be able to make these type of mistakes.

    2) TFA states that at one point shares for some companies dropped to a mere penny and then rebounded. Were people able to take advantage of the sudden drop to sweep and get a fast couple of millons due to the glitch?

    And in conclusion: Does the system's inherent frailty allow this type of event to be orchestrated in order to make a big profit, or a new type of terror attack?

    --
    As a Slashdot discussion grows longer, the probability of an analogy involving cars approaches one.
    1. Re:To whoever can help me understand this by russotto · · Score: 3, Interesting

      1) TFA states that someone made an input mistake and sold 16 billon Fortune 500 stocks instead of 16 millon. Did he have that many to sell? How big a player do you have to be to be able to make these type of mistakes.

      This sounds like the sort of apocryphal story someone made up meaning it sarcastically. ("WTF happened? Probably some moron hit 16 billion instead of 16 million!"). If there was a 16 billion dollar sell order, there's a record of it and it wouldn't still be speculation now.

      2) TFA states that at one point shares for some companies dropped to a mere penny and then rebounded. Were people able to take advantage of the sudden drop to sweep and get a fast couple of millons due to the glitch?

      Some of the exchanges reversed those transactions on some of the stocks, but not all of them. Some people with existing limit orders probably did pretty darned good.

  14. Re:Suggestion by LaughingCoder · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I hate it how people want to change the rules of the game whenever their strategy stops working

    First of all, stop losses are not a "strategy", they are a tactic. My strategy is to invest in solid, widely traded, predominantly blue chip companies or in broad indices via ETFs. None of these types of investments should gyrate 10% in value in a matter of minutes because that means hundreds of billions or even trillions of dollars are vanishing and/or appearing. Of course, sometimes oil wells explode and big companies can take an instantaneous hit in their market cap (stop losses salvaged a year's gains on my BP stock just one week ago). Those types of events are fortunately rare, affect one or a small group of companies and are what stop losses are mostly for. Thursday was more like a magician's trick. One minute the trillion dollars is in his left hand. Then a blink later it's in his right. I suppose it doesn't matter to you that the "left hand" was largely small investors like me and the "right hand" was hedge funds, high frequency programmed traders and banks, but to me something smells rotten.

    So, excuse me for saying this, but I want money to be transferred from emotional, panicky investors to calm, smart investors,

    How exactly does micro-penny programmed trading accomplish this? Positions are bought and sold in microseconds skimming micropennies on each share transacted. The computer with the fastest network access wins. This, you assert, is efficient allocation of capital? This is good because it transfers capital from "panicky emotional investors" to people who will better allocate it? What is the real economic benefit of this activity, because one undeniable side affect of it is to distort and destabilize the market.

    I very rarely find myself in favor of increased regulation, but in this case I think the rules do indeed need to be changed. If the majority of people lose faith in the market capital allocation will be severely and negatively impacted.

    --
    The more you regulate a company, the worse its products become.