Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by trpc 2636 days ago
Investment banks don't even have the secret sauce, hedge funds like Renaissance Technologies and D. E. Shaw & Co. are the ones that have it
2 comments

It's a bit disingenuous to say that BB's don't have a stake in HFT.

At the time of Aleynikov's case, Goldman was routinely at the top of the NYSE rankings with regard to programmatic trading volume.

> Goldman was routinely at the top of the NYSE rankings with regard to programmatic trading volume.

I took 'secret sauce' in GP's comment to mean 'profitable strategies'. Don't confuse volume with profitability. It's conceivable that a BB would deliberately lose money in some activities to have clients give them other, more profitable flow/business.

That's true. It's "LeFevre's corollary", if you will :)

N.B, Lapdance not gauranteed

Investment banks have proprietary trading desks that are effectively hedge funds.
GS used to be nicknamed “the worlds largest hedge fund”. They have plenty of world class proprietary tech, but the OP is right: this is not likely to be secret sauce at all.
That's Harvard's endowment. Harvard University itself exists at this point merely as a tax dodge for the $37 billion AUM hedge fund.
I don’t think this is accurate. Regulators release the Volcker Rule to shut down prop trading at banks.
The Volcker rule contains exemptions for certain prop trading activities. For example, trading in US government bonds is exempt.
Here's nice flowchart[0] to determine what counts as proprietary trading. There is a surprising amount that is still allowed.

https://www.davispolk.com/files/DavisPolk_Final_Volcker_Rule...

There still exist principal investing groups, as well as market making groups that can contribute to the bottom line.
Right. They have tons of trading activities that are non-proprietary. I’m sure they can always hide some positions that are truly proprietary but largely they are not supposed to put on positions for their own gain.