Live data from Hacker News

New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

noir.bloomberg.com

51–60 of 68 posts

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#51
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The stock market is not a closed system. The total value contained in the markets rises over time.

Not as a result of trading. You can argue that getting equity pricing right helps companies with their access to capital, but once you have the pricing right at 100ms I don't understand what value HFT firms are adding by pouring money and talent into getting the pricing right at 10ns. It seems like such an obvious win for society to mitigate the winner-take-all incentive of being first to market on a pricing disparit…

Not as a result of trading.

Actually, trading can and does increase the total value of the system. If I own $100 of Intel stock and you own $100 of AMD stock, exchanging half of our stock (so that we each own $50 of Intel and $50 of AMD) leaves us both better off, since we each have less risk.

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#52
post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So this argument makes a lot of sense, but you see that it's not the argument that's being employed against HFT in general, right? What I see are a lot of people arguing that the HFTs are getting an unfair edge on other traders, as if some main street stock picker was actually in competition with an HFT prop trading shop. My sense of it is that many of the people making this arguments believe that were it not for HFT…

I know this is an uncommon argument against HFT - I've only heard Tyler Cowen pushing this argument, but it's the one I find most plausible. As I said, a certain amount of HFT is a good thing. If I thought it was harmful, I'd quit my job as an HFT programmer and find something else [1]. I'm just pointing out that there are costs, which don't necessarily outweigh the benefits after a certain point. [1] This was a majo…

So you left academia to become an HFT programmer because you thought academia was too unproductive in the context of larger society? That's one hell of a scathing critique of academia and, er, um, I can't help but wonder if the money might have had something to do with it?

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#53

Am I the only one who thinks this is pointless? I don't trade billions of dollars of equities, but I am a long-term investor. One of my big rules as a long-term investor is that I can't sweat the 1/8ths and 1/4ths (borrowed from Philip Fisher). The time I spend worrying about these high frequency traders getting a few extra cents out of me is time wasted finding great companies that are selling at a discount. Sure...…

Through competition among each other, aren't the HFTs reducing overall arbitrage opportunities in markets? Therefore, as a small-time, long-term investor, aren't I enriched by a highly-competitive steady-state level of HFT market participants?

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#54

Excellent. Another dark pool for people who think that they are safe. There are already have a bunch of these, Crossfinder, Liquidnet etc. Here's how you game them without being detected. Have your long term hedge fund/mutual fund department set up an connection to that market. Make sure that you only do long term investing on these venues (e.g., buy blue chip stocks that have low PE) so that they don't ban you. Now…

You sound like you have a lot of experience here but I can't understand what you've written. Can you explain in a little more detail?

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#55
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know this is an uncommon argument against HFT - I've only heard Tyler Cowen pushing this argument, but it's the one I find most plausible. As I said, a certain amount of HFT is a good thing. If I thought it was harmful, I'd quit my job as an HFT programmer and find something else [1]. I'm just pointing out that there are costs, which don't necessarily outweigh the benefits after a certain point. [1] This was a majo…

So you left academia to become an HFT programmer because you thought academia was too unproductive in the context of larger society? That's one hell of a scathing critique of academia and, er, um, I can't help but wonder if the money might have had something to do with it?

Actually, the money wasn't a major factor. It's piling up, but I literally have no idea what to spend it on.

Here are my opinions from when I was an academic (I've only been working in HFT since March 2010, full time since May 2010):

My opinion from 347 days ago: universities have vastly more problems than that. They are huge bloated organizations structured around funneling money to employees (from both students and the government) rather than educating students. The main reason people still go is for status signaling purposes, otherwise they would have been replaced long ago.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1087281

From 406 days ago: a $10 million grant; my university will take about $5 million off the top in "overhead" (to be spent on overpaid administrators, student stress counselors, the latino student center, and maybe even education).

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=969664

(This was roughly the period when I decided to leave academia.)

From 469 days ago: The job description of "professor" is certainly a strange beast: teacher/scientist. It makes about as much sense as actor/programmer...The perverse incentives this creates are massive. Universities hire scientists rather than teachers in order to get their hands on half the scientist's grants. Scientists waste their time masquerading as teachers... This is harmful both to science (I'm not doing research in class) and students...Actual teachers are squeezed out, since there is no room for them.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=851218

From 999 days ago: Another part of the problem is that there is no incentive for cost control in the university...I'm currently teaching a "Quantitative Reasoning" class right now. Basically, take Weeks 1-2 of Prob&Stat and expand it to fill a whole semester (half a semester, due to poor planning and miscommunication). Some of this is my fault, some of it not...Plus, my students are all art/history/literature majors, and just don't need it. Everyone in the room would be better off keeping their $4,000 and not sitting through my class.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=166307

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#57
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I see how HFTs cut out the middlemen who used to profit from volatility One current big controversy among economists is whether the HFTs themselves have an effect on volatility (there are studies claiming all of "increases", "decreases", and "have little effect", but the evidence for any of those conclusions is weak, and it depends on exactly how you define volatility). A liquidity provider who provided added liqui…

Haven't the CFTC, the SEC, and the exchanges all basically absolved high-frequency traders at this point?

My reading of the SEC/CFTC report is pretty much the opposite of "absolved", though they consider HFTs only one factor magnifying the spike, rather than the initial cause (i.e., consider HFTs a volatility-increasing factor).

From the report's punchline:

The combined selling pressure from the Sell Algorithm, HFTs and other traders drove the price of the E-Mini down approximately 3% in just four minutes from the beginning of 2:41 p.m. through the end of 2:44 p.m. ... HFTs began to quickly buy and then resell contracts to each other – generating a “hot-potato” volume effect as the same positions were rapidly passed back and forth. Between 2:45:13 and 2:45:27, HFTs traded over 27,000 contracts, which accounted for about 49 percent of the total trading volume, while buying only about 200 additional contracts net.

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#58
post #9
post #2

I like that this innovation is market-driven and introduced as a competing alternative, rather than imposed on existing markets in the form of regulation. It will be interesting to see if this market provides better pricing for non-HFT participants. The HFT outfits claim they net out to better pricing for all ("liquidity benefits"), but that's somewhat hard to swallow given that they're acting as giant money sinks on…

I don't understand that last sentence at all. HFTs demonstrably are liquidity providers. That's a technical term with a real meaning: liquidity is the ability to trade when you want to trade in the quantity you want to trade it, and it most certainly is not a natural property of the market; in order to buy an instrument, someone has to be willing to sell it. Meanwhile, what is a "giant money sink", and how is that wh…

How would one demonstrate that HFTs actually provide liquidity? They get into and out of positions in milliseconds in a race with other HFTs to front-run a trade that was about to happen anyway. If they facilitated trades that were otherwise off the table, they wouldn't need to shave their latency hard, because there wouldn't be anyone else trying to make the same trade whom they'd have to beat. We should be compensating people for making better routing decisions with society's capital, not for making the same decisions but 1/100,000 of an hour sooner.

And formal market makers accept an obligation to stay in the market and provide full-time liquidity in return for their profits. I have to question the value of displacing and de-funding them in favor of HFTs who can walk away at the worst moment (as when they exacerbated the flash crash).

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#59

Excellent. Another dark pool for people who think that they are safe. There are already have a bunch of these, Crossfinder, Liquidnet etc. Here's how you game them without being detected. Have your long term hedge fund/mutual fund department set up an connection to that market. Make sure that you only do long term investing on these venues (e.g., buy blue chip stocks that have low PE) so that they don't ban you. Now…

This comment seems to be off the mark at a number of levels -- I love hacker news, and am doing this to return some of the value I have gotten from the community here.

Take "e.g., buy blue chip stocks that have low PE) so that they don't ban you. .. Now you feed the information about displayed liquidity on high volatility stocks that you are interested in trading (e.g., small biotechs) from those exchanges.."

If you are trading blue chips at an illiquid (CSFB run) market center what information will that give you about "small biotechs"?

".. dark pools aren't obligated to conform to NBBO" : this is an incorrect understanding of how US stock markets work -- dark pools, with exceptions that don't count for too much volume, will have to print at the NBBO (Reg NMS, Rule 611, if you want chapter and verse http://taft.law.uc.edu/CCL/regNMS/rule611.html).

Also you don't need to trade at this venue to see what is being traded there: another provision of Reg NMS requires all ATSs to print within a short period of time into the tape, which is also by law disseminated nationwide as the last sale info in the name. By simply looking to see prints from this center, and which side of the midquote the prints are on (called the Lee-Ready test in the field, after a 1991 paper by those guys) will tell you if there are long duration buy orders or long duration sell orders active.

Turning to the merits of the proposal above, seems like a good idea, although the fact that csfb (or any big bank) is running it will cause most experienced traders to be skeptical of the exalted rationales being presented. If a broker that is handling flow runs a market center as well, without exception they wind up abusing the flow or the market center to make more $$. Have read a lot of good stuff here; keep up the good work, all.

Re: New stock market for long-term investors/reducing high-frequency trading

#60
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you left academia to become an HFT programmer because you thought academia was too unproductive in the context of larger society? That's one hell of a scathing critique of academia and, er, um, I can't help but wonder if the money might have had something to do with it?

Actually, the money wasn't a major factor. It's piling up, but I literally have no idea what to spend it on. Here are my opinions from when I was an academic (I've only been working in HFT since March 2010, full time since May 2010): My opinion from 347 days ago: universities have vastly more problems than that. They are huge bloated organizations structured around funneling money to employees (from both students and…

Fair enough. Well, that'll stand as one hell of a scathing critique of academia then.
Post reply on HN