13 ms·
Transfer Stocks Out of Your Robinhood Account
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- dang 6y agoThis is a generic follow-up post rather than one that adds significant new information (SNI). Those aren't great submissions when there's a MOT (Major Ongoing Topic), because it will just produce the same generic discussion that's happening over and over: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25933543 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25933543. Better to wait for SNI. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=follow-up%20by%3Adang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor... https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22significant%20new%20information%22%20by%3Adang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... This approach goes back to the Great Snowden Snow-In of 2013, and has served HN well since then. https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=snowden%202013%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&sor...
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- optimalsolver 6y agoThe fact that so many of these bandwagoners didn't understand what a margin call is demonstrates that Robinhood was right to save them from themselves.
- naringas 6y agothen again, it was not its job
- jessaustin 6y agoMelvin Capital got the margin call. Presumably they were already familiar with the concept. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-25/citadel-point72-to-invest-275-billion-in-melvin-capital https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-25/citadel-p...
- bigyikes 6y agoGME is sitting pretty at $312 after hours. What did they get saved from?
- aaaxyz 6y agoAfter-hours is a bad indicator. It closed today at 194. Anyone who bought shares since Wednesday morning's peak of 300 is in the red.
- alasdair_ 6y ago>After-hours is a bad indicator. I'd be happy to bet you that it's a better indicator of actual price than the close. $100 to a charity of the loser's choice that GME will open closer to $314 than $194?
- mike00632 6y agoWhy not just donate your bet money to the people who inevitably lose money holding GameStop stock?
- kahrl 6y agoSometimes. But the volume of after hours trading of the stocks in question is extremely high. It is a pretty good indicator this this case.
- rcstank 6y agoYou’re joking or delusional.
- 8note 6y agoHow many of those Robin hood margin calls were on people waiting for their deposit to go through though?
- ingend88 6y agoWill this be like #deleteUber where enough damage can be made by #deleteRobinhood ?
- nexthash 6y agoI believe the more apt comparison is to the recent changes made to WhatsApp's privacy policy to integrate it closer to Facebook. The difficulty of moving to a different platform is relatively lower than getting rid of a social media network like Facebook (lower network effect, overlapping functionality with other offerings), which means a large hiccup like this can easily trigger mass migration to other brokerages.
- whoisjuan 6y agoCould be way worse given the amount of existing brokerage alternatives and the fact that nowadays they are all basically the same. I put a request to transfer today for just a single reason and it has nothing to do with me me being mad at them for halting trades. I simply don’t trust Robinhood anymore. I feel they are too leveraged and too exposed to the cross-winds of retail investors. Flashmob trading is officially a thing and Robinhood will be the most exposed brokerage when it comes to volatility and lack of liquidity. After what happened today it’s clear they can’t be trusted with my securities and even less with my liquid cash. I don’t want to have any kind of money in Robinhood because I have the weird feeling it could go down. That’s how much I distrust them at this point. If they really halted transactions because of lack of liquidity, imagine what could happen with them if we experience a bubble burst or any other major economic event that impacts public markets. I’m certain I’m not the only one feeling like this. If I could I would sell and re-buy at another brokerage but I want to avoid a tax event.
- sprite 6y agoI also put in a transfer request today, but from Merril Lynch->TDAmeritrade. ML blocked me from buying AMC this morning. The message they displayed was: Due to recent volatility in certain securities and to reduce risk of market volatility, we will be placing restrictions on certain securities, including increased margin requirements and/or limiting transactions. Game Stop (GME) and AMC Entertainment Holdings (AMC) are now blocked for opening transactions and they have also been moved to a 100% margin requirement for existing positions. Additionally, opening orders for GME and AMC will be cancelled including Day and Good-till-Cancelled (GTC) orders.
- malandrew 6y agoI've read that you shouldn't do this because it will tie things up for a while. Liquidating the stock and moving your assets apparently is more immediate. Can someone confirm?
- ogre_codes 6y agoThats been my experience in the past. But it's been a few years. In general consumer brokerages have little incentive to move fast when you are leaving them.
- joshribakoff 6y agoWhen brokerages aren’t allowing buys but only sells, this is exactly what they want (in the case of brokerages affiliated with institutional short sellers). Just stop buying on that platform.
- sturmeh 6y agoLiquidating your stocks to transfer them between firms has significant tax implications, both because it can cause a large number of capital gains events and can be seen as potential for being categorised as a wash sale.
- alasdair_ 6y agoThe problem is that if people in aggregate liquidate the stock, the shorts get to buy more cheaply that they otherwise would. It's unlikely you'd get to rebuy at the exact price you sold for either.
- JamesSwift 6y agoLiquidating still involves a 5 day hold before funds are "withdrawable" in robinhood
- ogre_codes 6y agoIt's been a while since I did this, but last time I transferred shares from one brokerage to another, it took several days. It seems to me that if you are holding GME, the last possible thing you want is being stuck in a position for a while. For this particular case, it might be a better choice is to liquidate your position, cash out and just open another brokerage account. I know this is the total opposite of what the WSBs are looking for but the alternative is transferring a position with $50k and when you can trade again its only worth $500.
- adventurer 6y agoI've transferred to and from multiple financial and brokerage firms including crypto and have never been charged a fee. Not one dollar. Robinhood is charging $75. *As others have mentioned, this is an ACAT not just ACH transfers. ACATS usually have fees. I also have done an ACAT but it was by chance that it was with one of the three companies listed in the link with $0 fees.
- Fjolsvith 6y agoTrying to stem the hemorrhaging.
- adventurer 6y agoIt might help but they were charging the fee back in May, which is as far back as the wayback machine shows for the page.
- kasey_junk 6y agoThey’ve charged it for as long as I’ve used Robinhood which is 4 or 5 years.
- ogre_codes 6y agoMy experience is similar (no transfer fee), neither from personal brokerage account or from a 401K into my personal IRA. I didn't notice that, that's bullshit.
- Sebguer 6y agoMany brokerages will probably cover the transfer fee, if you move to them. Alternatively, just leave the minimum value behind (though can be annoying since you have to migrate each position itself).
- thekyle 6y agoI highly doubt that any brokerage will cover a $75 transfer fee on a <$1k account.
- joshribakoff 6y agoTD has a guarantee where they will waive any fee if you say you’re not satisfied including the transfer out fee.
- ogre_codes 6y agoI've had pretty good luck with TD Ameritrade myself. I don't trade enough and when I do, the cup of coffee and bagel fee doesn't really impact my earnings. Back when Etrade was the "Discount" broker at $25/ trade fees bothered me a lot more.
- ditonal 6y agoThe RH apologists are going on long winded explanations about clearing houses (and to some extent there’s elements of “it’s too complex for your little brain”). But even to the extent it’s true, if I put in 5k from my checkings into RH and buy stock, why does Rh need all this liquidity to get orders filled? I understand turning margin accounts off, but that’s it . Past that, at best robinhoods business model is highly flawed , at worst it’s fraudulent. Because ultimately, all the finance whiz bang talk doesn’t change common sense that only allowing trades in one direction is unfair, and is incredibly bad optics when that direct benefits a huge player filled with conflicts of interest. But honestly I think the “robinhood is committing fraud” is being underweighted amongst “serious “ discussion.
- jonny383 6y agoSorry, but if you signed up to use Robin Hood and agreed to their terms and conditions, you don't have a leg to stand on.
- snypher 6y agoI think with Robinhood Instant you can by stock before the bank transfer has cleared, so they need cash on hand to fill the orders. The rising demand x rising order amount means they probably blew out their liquidity allowance. With new accounts starting with Instant capability, they are all on margin until the transfer clears.
- Rapzid 6y agoI know with Vanguard I can make trades without the funds in my money market. But that's perhaps because the trades can be covered by liquidating other holdings(I have x days to get the money in and they say they will liquidate to cover it if the money isn't there).
- samtheprogram 6y agoThat would make sense, except they allowed sells instead of buys. Right?
- 6y ago
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- rubyist5eva 6y agoThe robinhood execs that made the call to halt trading should be in jail.
- adrr 6y agoCurious what crime should be be charged with?
- shard972 6y agoMarket manipulation
- rubyist5eva 6y agoMarket manipulation is a crime. Stopping purchases so short sellers don't lose all their money is pretty obvious manipulation.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- adrr 6y agoMarket manipulation is the wrong crime and requires actual transactions. People keep saying he committed a crime but have failed to provide an actual law he violated. Or they point at some SEC violation which aren’t crimes and handled in civil court.
- cambalache 6y ago>Market manipulation is the wrong crime and requires actual transactions. You can be charged for securities fraud just by tweeting baloney if you are important enough. Ask Mr Musk. This is 100X worst. So no, you dont need actual transactions to be charged with fraud.
- adrr 6y agoSEC violations are civil violations and you don’t go to jail. I mentioned that in my original post.
- OiNG 6y agothere is a lot of misinformation out there about what happened today. its starting to to look like this all happened due to default concerns and the resulting changes in necessary collateral. I have no skin in this game (neither GME or Robinhood), but lets try to stay informed and not grab pitchforks based on non proven allegations.
- kahrl 6y agoRobinhood lost trust when they initially lied to their investors about why buying was halted. (Saying they cared about the little guy and these stocks were too volatile for them to handle) Then they came out and said it was a liquidity issue. If it was simply a liquidity issue, why weren't just margin orders halted? Why did they stop people with cash in their hand from buying stock? None of Robinhood's statements provide a full explanation. People are within their right to be absolutely livid at this moment and demand answers. Some facts: 1) There is a conflict of interest when Robinhood routes the majority of trades through a high frequency trading firm that has an interest in short positions. Citadel bailed out Melvin who [probably] illegally naked shorted 150% of the float. 2) The CNBC interview explaining the liquidity issues that aired today was filmed yesterday. 3) Mainstream media has been feeding lies to the public. Who is buying the stock? (It's foreign entities who hate America and capitalism!) Will the SEC come after the little guy?! Can they sue these investors?! (Absolutely not. Why the hell are you trying to put fear and doubt in the heads of these people?) These facts along with Robinhood's BS explanations lead people to believe that the reason that this happened is simply that the WRONG PEOPLE LOST MONEY.
- dragontamer 6y ago> Citadel bailed out Melvin who illegally naked shorted 150% of the float Yeah. Misinformation. #1. Melvin seems to have held a significant number of puts as far as I can tell. #2. Even if they were stupid enough to short 150% of the available shares, I don't believe there's anything illegal about that.
- easton 6y agoAt Melvin scale it most likely is illegal, if they didn’t have a reasonable chance at getting the shares they needed (which at ~140% of float, they don’t). https://www.sec.gov/news/press/2009/2009-172.htm https://www.sec.gov/news/press/2009/2009-172.htm
- janmo 6y agoJust open an account on some real broker website like DEGIRO that does not engage in to pay for order flow like RobinHood and Trade Republic do. I can still buy GME if I want to there, although I am not doing it.
- adrr 6y agoHow do they make money? And why does it matter who executes your transaction as a retail investor.
- kasey_junk 6y agoNote DEGIRO is a Dutch broker that requires strict residency requirements. They are covered by a regulatory regime that outlaws payment for order flow. You’ll pay a fee for trading through them even if you are engaging in activity that would get you a rebate on the exchange so they are taking their cut in other ways.
- owenversteeg 6y agoDeGiro is an excellent broker, though. They're basically _the_ serious broker in Europe - for wealthy Europeans it's either them or IBKR. Also, exchange rebates are usually very small amounts of the total trade, so for people who the fixed fees matter the most (people with less money in their account) the rebates would be insignificant.
- shirakawasuna 6y agoPlease note that this is a slow process and the stocks may be worthless by the time you completed the transfer. They will also likely freeze your ability to do anything with those stocks during that time. Some people say up to 15 days. If you're doing the meme stock with RH, it is probably safer to leave it there for a bit.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- cletus 6y agoThere are a decent number of people who eschew free products support by advertising. Such providers are daemonized for "selling your data" (or even "stealing your data"). You'll hear some quips as "if the product costs nothing, you are the product". What I find fascinating is these same people think nothing of the downside of Robinhood being commission-free. It's no secret that one way Robinhood makes money is by selling their order flow and choosing the exchange to fill your order that makes them the most money. Oh and that order flow goes to Capital. This enables frontrunning of retail orders. How can you have issues with privacy and user data and be OK with being monetized by Robinhood, which literally costs you money through poorer trade prices and reporting on customer trades to a party who seeks to profit off that information? So it's not a bad idea to transfer your shares out but the reasons for that predate GME. Oh and if you look at the likes of Schwab as a replacement, which is also commission free. They also sell order flow. Sometimes it's just better to pay for a service. At least then your interests are largely aligned (although with brokerage the provider has an incentive to encourage churn).
- 8note 6y agoI can set limit orders, so I don't particularly care about someone being able front run me. Sure, I might be losing some amount over time, but I'm still executing orders at the rate that I want
- suyash 6y agoWe proudly call it "free market" in the USA, what a joke. Same goes for 'free speech' which was proven not to be true by big tech. USA is run by monopolies and powerful people.
- 8note 6y agoFree speech seems preserved, the time required to set up a new account and get money into it/miss the opportunities says the market isn't free. Robinhood kicking you off wouldn't be a problem if you could immediately switch to another means like you can for speech
- suyash 6y agoTell me 3 other platforms that are like Facebook or Twitter or Youtube one can switch to ? This is an attack on free speech and free trade
- tribune 6y agoRobinHood has served the purpose of getting the other "real" brokerages to eliminate fees on trades. Now that they're not the only discount show in town, and given their track record of anti-user behavior, it's past time to move on
- liquidify 6y agoHow does one of these transfers of stock work from a technical perspective? Is it all just paper transfers that are physically sent in the mail, or is there some kind of digital backing that can be transferred like crypto?
- Lazare 6y agoStocks have been digitally backed since the late 60s. To quote the inimitable Matt Levine: > Nobody owns stock. What you own is an entitlement to stock held for you by your broker. But your broker doesn't own the stock either. What your broker owns is an entitlement to stock held for it by Cede & Co., which is a nominee of the Depository Trust Company, which is a company that is in the business of owning everyone's stock for them. This system sounds convoluted but actually makes it easy to keep track of things: If I sell stock to you, I don't have to courier over a paper share certificate, or call up the company and have it change its shareholder register. Our brokers just change some electronic entries at their DTC accounts and everything is cool. That simplifies things a bit, but basically yes, no paper transfers ever. There's a warehouse somewhere with all the paper certificates in it, they all technically belong to Cede & Co, and when (say) dividends are paid out, they all go to Cede & Co, who transfers the correct amounts to the various brokerages, who transfer the correct amount to their customers. There's a hilarious story (by Matt Levine, from which that quote is from) about some of the quirks in the system here: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2015-07-14/banks-forgot-who-was-supposed-to-own-dell-shares#footnote-1436883540292 https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2015-07-14/banks-... (Although it should be noted, it works fine for an absurdly large volume of transactions; the story is interesting because it is unusual, not because it reveals any deep flaws in the system.)
- liquidify 6y agoReally cool. Thanks for the response.
- flyGuyOnTheSly 6y agoI really don't know what all the fuss is about. Robinhood decided to halt trading on a number of stocks due to uncommon volatility, just for a day, so they can assess the matter. [0] And as is common practice in the trading world... when a market is closed, you are still allowed to close your position. Which means that you are allowed to sell, and not buy. (If robinhood allowed for true shorting then people could still technically buy by closing their short positions as well.) It's not some huge conspiracy to keep the price down for the little guy. It's actually a fairly common practice in financial exchanges around the world. [0] https://blog.robinhood.com/news/2021/1/28/an-update-on-market-volatility https://blog.robinhood.com/news/2021/1/28/an-update-on-marke...
- MattGaiser 6y agoEveryone would rather believe that trillions of dollars worth of companies and dozens of government officials are all conspiring because one (not terribly well liked) short seller and his fund exploded.
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y agoWho is supposed to buy the stock if nobody else in the app is allowed to enter positions? It's strictly forcing the transfer of the stock from a retail investor to a market maker. It's the antithesis of a free market where any market participant can act as buyer or seller. I don't think it implies there's a huge conspiracy, but it does implicate certain bad actors in the financial system. No, not everyone is bad. But the idea of some participants evading the rules is extremely plausible. It's happened in the past (see: 2008 GFC). Saying everyone thinks it's a 'huge conspiracy' is a straw man fallacy of the more legitimate concerns raised today.
- roywiggins 6y agoIf the only other people left to sell to are Robinhood investors, you're in trouble anyway.
- cush 6y agoRobinhood didn't halt selling, only buying, and they have a massive conflict of interest.
- xenihn 6y agoI'm pulling everything out tomorrow because I'm seriously scared of them becoming insolvent and collapsing at this point.
- alex-wallish 6y agoEven if that were to happen, aren't users insured up to $500k?
- xenihn 6y agoI don't know if that's stock values or just cash. Even if it is, it would be a huge hassle...
- fairity 6y agoWhy is Robinhood getting singled out when six brokerages implemented the exact same trade restrictions?
- JMTQp8lwXL 6y agoLikely because they were the first, and the rest caved in shortly thereafter (though in some cases, it was the clearing houses who stopped taking orders). In RH's case, it was RH's management itself that made the call, which makes them more accountable to the decision. They can't point to their clearing house and say, "don't blame us: it was the clearing house".
- perl4ever 6y agoI don't think they were the first. I think TDA for example restricted people from buying GME the day before.
- cacarr 6y agoAlso, RH's initial communication about the matter was full of considerable shit -- moreso than other brokerages.
- golover721 6y agoIf you are going to transfer your stock just make sure you are transferring it to a broker that is self clearing. Or at the very least make sure the broker doesn't use Apex. Which has a long history of being terrible.
- _hitesh_ 6y agoDid it last year. Moved to fidelity. No regrets at all.
- ineedasername 6y agoThe most fascinating thing, to me, about all of this is the potential for large groups of retail investors to invest in a company not because it's doing well, or they think it's undervalued, but because they want it to do well-- investing with the specific intent to give it the resources needed to do well. Perhaps unintended, this seems to be the net result with AMC. A few days ago they probably wondered how to keep the lights on. Now they've sold some stock at a premium and have a lot more cash on hand to trudge along as (hopefully) vaccines mostly resolve their issues. I can imagine the emergence of a different sort of activist investor: large groups that find distressed companies they really want to do well, and instead of the company getting eaten by a private equity shark, they're given the resources for a turn around. (Some-- many? -- would fail anyway) I recognize this probably unrealistically optimistic, but I imagine some Occupy Wall Street veterans are having a big laugh right now either way.
- totalZero 6y agoI mean, that's a pretty legitimate reason to invest, no? Softbank bought Sprint with the intent to give it the resources needed to do well. They pumped money into the company to cover debt service until eventually it merged with T-Mobile. AMC got out of $600mm of debt as a result of its share price appreciation in all this madness. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/amc-entertainment-to-issue-444-million-shares-as-investors-opt-to-convert-600-million-of-convertible-debt-2021-01-28 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/amc-entertainment-to-issue... Share price is not arbitrary. It has ramifications for a company's credit, debt load, and ability to make acquisitions.
- ineedasername 6y agoSure: I guess what I find novel is that rather than a Softbank, a self-organizing process of retail investors would drive the process. For AMC debt: wow, that's pretty insane. Lots more cash, much less debt. They should encourage employees to become premium reddit members as a thank-you
- MattGaiser 6y ago> investing with the specific intent to give it the resources needed to do well Buying shares only sends money to the company if they issue new ones. I am not aware of Gamestop doing that.
- hourislate 6y agoI'm not sure if the following is correct but according to the post on WSB, they ran out of Stock. There was a couple of folks who said their market order was filled at 5k for a share. Something wonky happened and they had to force sales. https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/l7bpf5/30_seconds_from_triggering_market_nuclear_bomb/ https://old.reddit.com/r/wallstreetbets/comments/l7bpf5/30_s...
- Triv888 6y agoWhen I switched from Robinhood, I just sold all my holdings to avoid transfer fees... that was 2 months ago
- archon810 6y agoBetter make sure you were holding shares for at least a year, otherwise you're getting taxed on short term gains.
- harry8 6y agohttps://mobile.twitter.com/SawyerHackett/status/1354886861651632133 https://mobile.twitter.com/SawyerHackett/status/135488686165... Edit: better link Is that fabricated, or did Robinhood really sell someone down against their will?
- psychlops 6y agoI saw this earlier. My guess is that it was a margin call. edit: and with the new link you sent, it says the customer probably didn't have collateral. They will absolutely sell on a margin call.
- harry8 6y agoIt's not an option. It's common stock and a long position. A margin call you can settle with cash. There's nothing here that says "you didn't deposit cash so we're selling your position(s) of value to make margin" I mean it's possible, but I'm in no way going to default to that explanation absent evidence. Edit: it explicitly cites the "risk of brokering your position" in GME shares. If this isn't faked it's an astoundingly, jaw droppingly, nakedly and utterly amazing thing to do.
- themihai 6y ago- They automatically liquidate your options positions - They don't let any retailer buy stocks(i'm not even talking about options/leverage). - They only let retailers sell only (to hedge funds). - Then they come up with the " clearing houses" explanations...sure..but the price moved in the "right" direction right? Probably the hedge funds shorted even more as the bet was sure: block them from buying and the stock surely won't go up! - Good news: the situation in monitored and "limited" trading will be allowed tomorrow...probably enough to make people dump the stock and let the hedge fund managers cover their naked shorts. Let's hope the retailers will not get scared off, hold their ground and push the hedge funds into gamma squeeze!
- chovybizzass 6y agouse webull.com i am transfering my portfolio from tda to webull
- cyberpsybin 6y agoCitadel > Melvin Capital Citadel > Robinhood
- erikromo 6y agomailto:erik.romo@samsung.com