4 ms·
> it’s largely a big firm world now. Largely, though I receive 1 or 2 job specs every week for start ups with the keywords 'hft' and 'low latency'. Admittedly
by DrBazza 3y ago
> it’s largely a big firm world now.
Largely, though I receive 1 or 2 job specs every week for start ups with the keywords 'hft' and 'low latency'. Admittedly there's going to be duplication there if you read them closely.
I think it's a bit of a myth that (ignoring FPGAs) that writing a low-latency software trading system is a time/cost expensive process. Anecdata = I worked at two firms where we did a rewrite from scratch with teams of 5-6 people and traded in the market within 3 months. I'd argue a senior dev that's been around the block a few times could achieve similar when you remove corporate politics, and bikeshedding over design.
The big firm part is paying for multiple quants at $200k++ to come up with strategies and historic market data access for trading models. Small firms are getting backing as long as the co-founders are 'ex-CxO from MegaCorp'.
- dm3 3y ago> I think it's a bit of a myth that (ignoring FPGAs) that writing a low-latency software trading system is a time/cost expensive process. This depends a lot on the complexity of the trading system and the trading venue specifics. A system to trade single stocks or futures can be built, certified and running in 3 months. A system for options market making will take a lot longer.
- DrBazza 3y agoYes, stocks and futures was exactly what I was talking about. Though we also hit the market with options models within another couple of months. The big costs for small firms are historic data (if you don't have any), colo, distance to exchange, and number of connections. From the number of job specs I see, it feels like the HFT/low latency market place is healthy enough that there are always new firms appearing. It's competitive, so it's hardly surprising that if someone has new ideas they'll find a backer.