4 ms·
Sorry but I have to disagree strongly here. Having two separate algos directly and actively trading in the wild is highly unusual. There are obvious reasons f
by Galanwe 6y ago
Sorry but I have to disagree strongly here.
Having two separate algos directly and actively trading in the wild is highly unusual.
There are obvious reasons for which you don't want your algos to trade one against the other on the market.
First, it's very dangerous as you can end up in the situation described here where you essentially self make the market.
But more directly for simple execution costs/fees reasons.
I don't know of any single player that has concurrent algos where there is not a "netting" layer between algos and the market, so that concurrent trades are matched internally before reaching the market.
- NaturalPhallacy 6y ago>Having two separate algos directly and actively trading in the wild is highly unusual. No it's not. ATD had like 50. >There are obvious reasons for which you don't want your algos to trade one against the other on the market. Who said they're trading against each other? Just look at GME. Swapping shares back and forth makes trading volume go up. Every imbalance is gameable, and they have armies of people whose job is to find every gameable imbalance and make money off of it. >First, it's very dangerous as you can end up in the situation described here where you essentially self make the market. As we've seen when traders have bankrupted themselves. >I don't know of any single player that has concurrent algos where there is not a "netting" layer between algos and the market, so that concurrent trades are matched internally before reaching the market. Well I know of one that had 15+, and coinbase just got busted with two so...