Slashdot Mirror
Adaptation From Flash Boys Offers Inside Look at High-Frequency Trading
Lasrick (2629253) writes "This NYT adaptation from the book provides an in-depth and infuriating look at how the stock market is rigged. Brad Katsuyama of the Royal Bank of Canada couldn't understand why stock he was trying to buy would suddenly vanish: 'Before RBC acquired this supposed state-of-the-art electronic-trading firm, Katsuyama's computers worked as he expected them to. Suddenly they didn't. It used to be that when his trading screens showed 10,000 shares of Intel offered at $22 a share, it meant that he could buy 10,000 shares of Intel for $22 a share. He had only to push a button. By the spring of 2007, however, when he pushed the button to complete a trade, the offers would vanish.' The ensuing investigation by Katsuyama led him to design a program that actually slowed down the trades. But Katsuyama's investigation revealed so much about how the system is rigged."
I think corps are fucking us by harping on government debt, which has never mattered and is not the crisis they cynically claim it is, when in private they laugh and tell each other "Reagan proved deficits don't matter" and wait till their party gets in so they can run up the debt to new record levels. Because they know it doesn't matter.
how exactly is this rigged for the longer term investor?
hedge funds have always been about finding some unknown niche with tiny profit potential and making it up on volume with borrowed money
Last August the ACM had a whole issue on detailed technical aspects of all parts of trading. I dont recall talk a part on front-trading. But how to shave off yet another few microseconds. Fascinating.
HFT should be banned, there is nothing these robo-traders contribute to society except for profit for themselves. The argument that they provide for liquidity of the market, or whatever, would not change if everyone would be trading at second scale instead of microsecond scale. My proposal (as someone how knows nothing about stock markets): make it a level playing field and only allow trading at say exact 30 second intervals or so, which should be synced world-wide. In this way, the big firms would only have an advantage over the small guy when new information becomes available in the last half second before the deadline, instead of on every instance of new information. After everyone has placed their orders for the current round, the stock market then takes a few seconds to update all stock prizes, after which everyone has 'infinite time' to compute his action for the next round.
karma police: arrest this man, he talks in maths; he buzzes like a fridge, he's like a detuned radio. [radiohead]
You can opt out of the beta by hitting the Slashdot Classic link in the footer. Or click this: http://slashdot.org/?nobeta=1
The stock market long ago ceased being about owning pieces companies with companies paying out dividends. It's the same bet that prices are going up that it was in 1929, the HFT's have just figured out how to micro-jack the prices. There is a simple simple fix. Stocks are made non-fungible and you must own for 24 hours before you can trade. This puts pricing back onto a time scale over which the actual productivity or fickle fortunes of a company can change. The economic production of a real company doesn't change on the millisecond time scale.
I sure am proud that our country's best and brightest are focusing their efforts on optimization of moving around virtual little green pieces of paper.
It's not like we have real problems that need to be addressed.
the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff
Nobody trades like this, and nobody traded like this in the early 2000s. That trading style has been obsolete for 20 years, and predates HFT. You don't see something, decide you want that, and then hit Enter or click your mouse button.
In this example, you decide the maximum price you want to pay in advance, and you enter a limit order. If you're selling you decide upon your minimum selling price, and in the same way you enter a limit order. You've locked in your profit, regardless of timing.
If you're setting up some sort of combination, you enter the triggering parameters in advance, and you don't even need to see what was being done on screen.
People say that computers are trading with each other. That is false. That's like saying that Microsoft Word writes documents. Trading companies, their traders, and their programmers write trading software and adjust parameters. 30 years ago, the "software" was held in the traders' minds, and the execution was done via outcry. The underlying mathematics is the same, and traders don't have to hold these calculations in their minds.
The problem here is this. Extremely rich companies can have the fastest links to the exchanges, but this is no different from the olden days where the oldest and richest companies had the smartest and most well-connected traders. The tools of the trade are slightly different, but rich and successful companies will leverage their money to be the most successful, or else they will be replaced by somebody else.
My own background is that I wrote a derivative trading system between 1999-2006 for a tiny company that ultimately didn't make it because we couldn't compete against the big boys. This angst about HFT is largely technophobia. The traders trade, they learn the software, and they often don't understand how it works. To programmers like me, the algorithms are a black box, but the traders do understand the mathematics pretty well. When you have traders coming out against HFT, you have traders who couldn't understand the software or were burned because their companies weren't rich enough.
People who have never worked in this field who are against HFT really don't understand computer-based trading very well, from either a programmer's perspective or a trader's perspective. Keep in mind that the job of a computer is to make mundane things happen more quickly, so we can focus on more human things. You want your 401K to execute as accurately-priced trades as possible. HFT ensures that both styles of trading benefit.
In IT, of course...
And one thing I've learned is that financial firms generally speaking, don't beat the market. If you look at the S&P 500 as a baseline index for the health of the economy (and it might not be perfect, but it's a good measure), 80% of firms CANNOT beat the S&P in the same timeframe. If the S&P loses, those private firms lose too.
And even if they did... maybe 1-2% over? Which you won't get, because that's what they charge in FEES to manage their funds.
So basically HFT exists, because people still have the idea that investing with Morgan Stanley or somebody is a great idea, and so MS have a huge amount of equity to derive ridiculous profits on for who else -- themselves. Add to that the fees they charge to manage the funds they offer, and the marginal rates of return that investors get well... you know how it goes.
Hopefully my job interviews pending will pan out and I'll get out of finance for good; but sadly the money is what has kept me there, especially with the student loans... yet another benefit from our wonderful financial industry.
The price is always right if someone else is paying.
Best article on HFT that I've ever read. Explains in fine detail how institutional players get fleeced by high frequency traders. Took a while to read the whole thing, but well worth the time.
One thing to note to all of us retail investors, though... our tiny orders aren't really getting fleeced, and with spreads on most stocks of only $0.01 our trading overheads are miniscule compared to 20 years ago. Standard brokerage fees trump (by several orders of magnitude) HFT losses for people like us.
-Matt
That will slow down the trading and encourage long-term investment....
I'm bit suprised at bad reputation HFT has at Slashdot.
[...]
This is war.
Asked and answered, perhaps?
I, for one, feel that the human race has far better things it could be doing with its time instead of obsessing over increasing some numerical values to the detriment of other numerical values.
But then, that's a bit like my (admittedly ill-informed) thoughts on money, sometimes. We invented it, and yet somehow we no longer seem to be in control of it, and it's got us dancing to its tune. Never mind Skynet; what happens when the money markets decide they no longer need us?
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.