> Jane Street is stupidly profitable — net trading revenues of $4.4bn in the first quarter, after a $10.5bn haul in 2023, and a profit margin north of 70 per cent — but it bears repeating. That is the fourth straight year of net trading revenues exceeding $10bn. Gross revenues came at a record $21.9bn in 2023, up 34 per cent from 2022. Yes, I suppose this is all something to get all starry-eyed over, Jane Street encr…
Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
301–310 of 343 posts
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#302Earlier quoted context omitted.
Get a Bloomberg Terminal - just for the social-networking features.
$24k per year to get a job?
But even taken at face-value, Bloomberg's annual fee is comparable to the yearly cost of an undergraduate degree - so it might very well be a fair deal.
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#303Earlier quoted context omitted.
$100k buy in at the hedgefund I know. Its a big figure for most but starting salaries, friends & family, and personal loans will get you there. >20% return is quite easy to justify. You're also looking at a 50%-200% annual bonus, mostly leaning to the higher end of the range. Its a very different world!
> $100k buy in at the hedgefund I know. Its a big figure for most but starting salaries, friends & family, and personal loans will get you there. Surely this is a HN culture bubble? Very few people can borrow tens of thousands of dollars from family and friends to lend to a hedge fund . Not only would I be refused, I'd damage friendships by exposing the moral vacuum at my core.
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#304Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do agree with you. It's neither sustainable not really desirable, the amount of effort and resources and smart people dedicated to the financial sector.
Less smart people are employed by the financial sector than in the past and less will be in the future.
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#305Earlier quoted context omitted.
I highlighted Jane Street's recruiting outreaches specifically, when talking with an R&D unit at a big financial institution. (I also mentioned the tactic of fringe-tech-that-some-heavy-hitters-love. OCaml, Lisp, Rust, Erlang, etc.) When I first heard of Jane Street, it sounded like Yaron Minsky was going around to MIT and such, high-touch, trying to hire just a few people. And later, things like this blog: https://b…
It seems their thinking is part of what led them to JS in the first place, which is a bit of negative and maybe they had some ideas reinforced there. But I also think they were some of the more extreme ones to begin with. They obviously didn't internalize JS's concerns about risk at all lol.
The things that made them great traders also made them much riskier choices to lead a larger company. To them, compliance is an obstacle in the way of profitable trades.
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#306Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hectolitre is 100 litres, not 100ml, but hectogram is 100g, not 100kg? Very confusing!
I mean Hecto = 100 Hectoliter = 100 litres Hectogram = 100 grams Kilo = 1000 Kiloliter = 1000 litres Kilogram = 1000 grams It doesn't look that confusing?
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#307> Jane Street is stupidly profitable — net trading revenues of $4.4bn in the first quarter, after a $10.5bn haul in 2023, and a profit margin north of 70 per cent — but it bears repeating. That is the fourth straight year of net trading revenues exceeding $10bn. Gross revenues came at a record $21.9bn in 2023, up 34 per cent from 2022. Yes, I suppose this is all something to get all starry-eyed over, Jane Street encr…
They provide market liquidity. The chances that a seller and buyer come together at the exact same time across the 7.5 hours of open market operations is fairly low, so they buy from sellers and sell to buyers and hold in between to keep the markets liquid. This liquidity costs(often advertised as the bid/ask spread). We could essentially close them down if we moved all trading to say 1 hour a day. Though most retail…
I actually know a little about this space. You know what the easiest response is that is always the answer?
"We provide liquidity".
Sounds important, most people don't get it, it works.
But it's not like the market is going to grind to a halt if Jane Street disappears overnight. Of course, people will say that. Not people telling you the truth.
I actually considered "but, but, THE LIQUIDITY!" in my answer but I felt there was sufficient snark.
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#308Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
First, I never said it was a great idea, or that we should . It's not about envy or not. Liquidity provides a great service, if we need long market hours. If we don't need long market hours, it arguably provides little to no value. Yes it would massively reduce liquidity, that's the point :) Yes volatility would go up during that hour(especially at the beginning), because everyone would have to figure out the new pri…
This is categorically false. Long electronic trading hours are simply a better solution, a more fair solution, a more competitive solution, a more efficient solution, and what the market is demanding. There is no trade off, especially as most liquidity is supplied by automated systems that can operated 24/7/365 if needed.
When you compress transactions into specific time frames it isn't about forcing buyers and sellers to meet, you actually will reduce the numbers of buyers and sellers overall, you will lower the value of the asset, because assets are given liquidity premiums. The more you restrict transactions and reduce liquidity the less utility an asset has. This is one of the often overlooked reasons Bitcoin has more intrinsic value than is assumed at first by observers.
When a primary issuer creates new securities this is very different situation and why an auction is needed, for example for new treasury bonds or any other initial offering. In that situation there is only 1 seller, the issuer, and the question is what is the starting fair price at which buyers appear.
In a secondary market there are many current owners of the asset and many potential sellers. They don't decide to sell or buy independently and then meet. That is simply not what occurs. Instead think that every current owner is a potential seller and every participant who follows that market is a potential buyer. Sellers attract buyers, buyers attract sellers, both when they push the prices around via the market makers. By extending the time period for this dynamic to occur to continuous central limit order books (CLOBs) it make the most efficient process, periodic auctions have been proven to be very poor ideas and results in choice paralysis of participants, CLOBs incentivize higher rates of decision making and healthier dynamics. All properly operated CLOBs will also have a circuit breaker to auctions should time be need to digest rapidly changing information and the continuous book can't be created within some limits.
By having extended market hours you widen the pool of buyers and sellers who can participate. You also allow markets to instantly digest new information as quickly as possible, this is most fair to all participants equally.
Extended trading hours are strictly better than restricted trading hours.
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#309I work in quantitative finance and have wanted to to start using OCaml at work for years. I just find that unless you are at a shop like Jane Street with a well developed proprietary code base, internally developed tooling, etc, there just isn't the ecosystem available for me to be nearly as productive as I can be in other well accepted languages in the quant dev space...which is a bummer. It's been a little while si…
Any tips for getting a first quant job ? Is learning C++ a must?
For quants (progression towards a trader / portfolio manager), Python / Matlab / R is enough.
Re: Takeaways from the Jane Street bond prospectus
#310Earlier quoted context omitted.
Their revenue per employee is probably similar to revenue of a single mid size company.
From the article: > At the end of 2023. Jane Street employed 2,631 people, so that equates to almost $4mn of net revenue per head on average. In adjusted EBITDA, it comes to $2.83mn per employee (or nearly $22mn for each of the 482 traders actual traders at Jane Street.) And regarding compensation: > Given Jane Street’s disclosed compensation and benefits of $2.4bn last year, this works out to over $900k for each emp…