[fighterpilot]

I don't know why you're bringing this up because it's not relevant, and nor is it accurate. You can have high turnover rates in batch auction strategy as well as a continuous trading strategy, this market structure change won't change that. And you can have a HFT strat with low turnover, e.g in a large tick name that barely moves where you might get five latency sensitive trades per day.

[Retric]

Latency sensitivity and Alo trading isn’t the same thing as HFT.

“Very short time-frames for establishing and liquidating positions.” strait from the SEC: https://www.sec.gov/marketstructure/research/hft_lit_review_...

Now it’s true an individual stock may only see 5 trades per day from a HFT algo, but theirs more than just one stock. The larger pool of money sitting around waiting for those 5 trades the lower your ROI. So, the obvious strategy is to reuse the same pool of money to back multiple different strategies.

[fighterpilot]

A HFT that's trading bond futures may only have a handful of trades per day and hold for a long time because it's hard to liquidate effectively. Sometimes they just range all day.

Anyway my point is that it's wrong to think that HFT are going out of business with this change because it's a fundamental misunderstanding of HFT. There's almost always an ML component and always an execution component and these two skills are going to be critical to profiting off the new market structure. Citadel, Jump, Tower, you name it. I promise you they will be all over this new structure.

[Retric]

> all over this new structure

I completely agree, and they are going to use the same tools. The question is if this change is a net positive trade for the economy, and that I don’t know but I have heard reasonable arguments in favor.