|
|
|
|
|
by branchless
3049 days ago
|
|
Agreed, but there is a huge, huge amount of people doing very little of value. All the games with low latency and the rules for order placement could be changed to greatly simplify and stop the race to ever-lower latency. I work in it, it's a total waste of resources. Our banking sectors are insanely large. Aren't they supposed to be efficient? Why such a large % of the economy? |
|
You want them competing with each other. To win they have to make the tightest price before a competitor, which either lowers their margins or requires them to bring new information to the market sooner.
If you accept that markets require intermediaries to bridge liquidity gaps in time, place, and product, then high speed traders are far less wasteful than the firms they replaced. Consider this: In 2000 Goldman Sachs bought Spear, Leeds & Kellogg (SLK), a large NYSE dealer. SLK employed 2500 people and earned over a billion dollars annually. That's one firm on one exchange. Each market had thousands of men in jackets yelling at each other, making a much bigger spread on transactions, and giving less accurate pricing.
Today there are a couple thousand people involved in low latency trading across all markets/firms and the entire industry makes a few billion dollars a year. Teams with a handful of quant researchers make markets in every listed stock globally.