|
|
|
|
|
by gd1
4176 days ago
|
|
>95 percent of high-frequency trader orders are cancelled So what. 99.9999999% of the pixels blatted onto your screen aren't looked at. Why do you care? Let's say I'm making a market in a derivative product (A), one where the price is 'derived' from the price of another product (B). By a simple equation. Let's say A = 2 * B. No one likes product A. No one trades it. Lots of people trade B. All day long B moves around. B ticks up, I have to cancel my bid and offer on A and move them up 2 ticks (I do it quickly, cos I'm an evil HFT). B ticks down, I have to cancel my bid and offer on B and move it down 2 ticks. All day long I move my quotes. No one fucking trades. 100% of my orders are cancelled and replaced on a different price. Why do you care? A limit order is a limit order. It isn't doing anyone any harm by being there. >Some high-frequency traders have claimed to be profitable on over 99 percent of their trading days. McDonalds are profitable on 100% of their trading days. Casinos are likely profitable on 99% of their trading days. If they weren't profitable they wouldn't be doing it. Market-makers like Virtu are more service providers than they are 'traders'. They are the middle men who allow others to trade and take risk, and extract a small fee for doing so. Here's a good analysis to read: http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2014/11/13/virtus-losing-day-... |
|
However, thinking logically about the whole HFT business: As I understand it it's something like this:
Let's say I want to buy 100 apples at $1 a piece. A middle man comes and says: I see that you want to buy 100 apples. Let me buy them for you. Here they are (an apple is now $1.001)
Why do I need this middle man to steal from me? You will probably say that they are providing liquidity. It's still stealing and the markets had enough liquidity before the whole HFT gang came.
Maybe I'm wrong, if so please explain me why.