4 ms·
On exactly what front are exchanges competing? Order types? Fees? Volume? Differences in any of these are very often opaque to the customer. From what I've see
by theseatoms 11y ago
On exactly what front are exchanges competing? Order types? Fees? Volume? Differences in any of these are very often opaque to the customer.
From what I've seen, exchanges are basically functionally equivalent, since they provide a utility-like service. And, as Vanguard points out, more trading venues means higher market frictions and costs.
TBH I'm still trying to forming a strong opinion on the issue, as indicated by "probably" in my initial comment. And I think it's a topic worth discussing.
- gnaritas 11y agoIt doesn't matter if it's opaque to the customer or if every exchange is selling an identical product; there's reason for multiple exchanges to exist to avoid monopoly. Multiple players want to play in the market, that means multiple exchanges. Saying there should only be one exchange is picking a winner and giving them the entire market.