8 ms·

I started building out tools to track congressional stock trading in 2020. Since then, I believe there have been 9 other proposals similar to this one. None of

I started building out tools to track congressional stock trading in 2020. Since then, I believe there have been 9 other proposals similar to this one. None of them have been even called to a vote. It seem like Congress is pretty unwilling to regulate its own trading. Until they are, feel free to track the trading here: https://www.quiverquant.com/congresstrading/ https://www.quiverquant.com/congresstrading/

jakearmitage 3y ago
I wish there was a tool that allowed me to follow Congress as if it was an index. Automatically buying and selling what they buy and sell. Right from my Fidelity or something.
- nickpeterson 3y ago
  If it got popular enough, congressmen would heavily buy a stock their spouse has short term options on, why not?
- minkzilla 3y ago
  NANC and KRUZ ETFs track democrats and republican holdings respectively. A word of caution: there are articles online that have looked at individual senators and most of them unperformed compared to the SP500
- shagmin 3y ago
  Someone with some spare cash for seed funding could file with the SEC to create an ETF that does exactly this.
rwmj 3y ago
Does a "Congress tracker fund" make money? What with all the rumoured insider trading ...
- jjoonathan 3y ago
  NANC and KRUZ are the ticker symbols (I wish I was joking)
  - smallerfish 3y ago
    Interesting that NANC is doing so much better than KRUZ. Any ideas why?
    - nordsieck 3y ago
      > Interesting that NANC is doing so much better than KRUZ. Any ideas why? Presumably because they're on different committees. Or have different friends. Just like existing law, pending legislation is too vast for any one person to know it all.
    - ckardat123 3y ago
      Nancy Pelosi holds a ton of Microsoft stock, I believe up to $25M last time I checked. I haven't checked the NANC holdings, but her Microsoft position has definitely been carrying our Nancy Pelosi Strategy on Quiver.
- ckardat123 3y ago
  Pretty small out-of-sample window, but we built a trading strategy on top of congressional trading data and it's done well since we launched it last year. You can see the backtest performance here, but the holdings and advanced metrics are behind a paywall (apologies in advance): https://www.quiverquant.com/strategies/ https://www.quiverquant.com/strategies/ As others have pointed out, there is a delay between when the trades are made and when they are disclosed and our strategy is able to act on them. However, this is somewhat countered by the fact that politicians tend to hold stocks for long periods of time. There are definitely some examples of politicians trading a stock right before a massive market moving event, but I think they are generally looking at a longer time horizon when they are investing.
- aketchum 3y ago
  I think there is a delay on stock disclosures, like they only have to disclose purchase/sale once a quarter or something which makes it hard to profitably copy their trading.
smcin 3y ago
Sen Cynthia Loomis (R-WY) [EDIT: 'Lummis'] doesn't show up on the list (for stocks), is she still the biggest crypto trader? https://www.marketwatch.com/story/congresss-crypto-traders-the-u-s-lawmakers-who-buy-and-sell-digital-currencies-11643983477 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/congresss-crypto-traders-t...
- ckardat123 3y ago
  The list on the homepage just shows recent transactions. You can search for individuals on top to see their full transaction list. Lummis bought up to $100K of Bitcoin in 2021: https://www.quiverquant.com/congresstrading/politician/Cynthia%20Lummis https://www.quiverquant.com/congresstrading/politician/Cynth...
  - smcin 3y ago
    I had already searched your site and found nothing. But that was because I misspelled her name as 'Loomis' not 'Lummis'. Anyway when I search under correct name, I only find 2 trades, from 2021. She really had no other trades?
    - ckardat123 3y ago
      Yeah looks like it. Here's where you can search for the source disclosures - only seeing two trades on her periodic transaction reports: https://efdsearch.senate.gov/search/ https://efdsearch.senate.gov/search/
carabiner 3y ago
Also https://www.capitoltrades.com/ https://www.capitoltrades.com/
PartiallyTyped 3y ago
Unusualwhales (not affiliated) does that too!
ed_balls 3y ago
TBH will the regulation change much? If congressmen won't be allow to own stock, they will use proxy (wife, siblings, parents, in-laws).
- ckardat123 3y ago
  I think that if there were a law in place that made it illegal for congressmen to trade, it would be easier to catch insider trading because they would be forced to trade by proxy like you mentioned. It's really hard to prove someone traded off of insider information if they make a decision to buy/sell for themselves. If they don't tell anyone else why they made the trade, you don't really have any proof that it was made off of material non-public information. If a congressman is forced to ask someone else to trade for them, they might be careless and you might be able to find evidence via text messages or phone records. The last time a U.S. Representative got convicted for insider trading, it was because he called his son to tell him to trade a stock that he had insider information on: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-congressman-christopher-collins-sentenced-insider-trading-scheme-and-lying https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-congressman-chri...
  - pc86 3y ago
    One thing I've always wondered about this is how to handle circumstantial evidence. Let's say you have a relative who may have insider information on a stock. You talk sometimes but not regularly. They call you (as they occasionally do) the day before you trade a stock and it performs favorably within a short time period. Are you now in a position where you have to prove a negative? Are there people in prison right now because of exactly this type of occurrence, or is it so circumstantial that it's not even pursued unless there is additional evidence, e.g. you always buy $500-1k in stock but after this call you buy $10k in options or something.
    - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 3y ago
      According to one of my finance professors in university, it's somewhat tough to actually get convicted for insider trading, and there are certain circles where everyone does it. The people who do get convicted are usually those who were being particularly egregious or who pissed someone off enough to rat them out. For example, Martha Stewart got convicted because her assistant (whom she regularly called a "little shit") decided to testify against her.
samsolomon 3y ago
Love the font choice! Never heard of Rubik, but I like stocky letters with a tall x-height. Kind of reminds me of Colfax. https://processtypefoundry.com/fonts/colfax/ https://processtypefoundry.com/fonts/colfax/ I might add the following for a slightly crisper look: text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased;
- ckardat123 3y ago
  Thanks! Appreciate the suggestion, I'll check out how that looks.
nashashmi 3y ago
The rules on Congressman trading should be coming from their districts and states that they represent. it could possibly hurt the quality of congressmen and senators that run for election if this rule is implemented at a federal level.
- pc86 3y ago
  How so? One, there are no district-specific rules for members of Congress. But even assuming states are legally able to restrict federal officials' trading, why is it better to have some states regulate it and some states not compared to a consistent federal rule one way or the other? "Good people won't run for Senate if we don't let them trade stocks on the information they get" doesn't really make that much sense to me.
  - nashashmi 3y ago
    Apparently there was a state rule for the NJ senator that he could not run for president while in senate. They changed it for Cory Booker. So apparently it is possible to add rules for senators and congressman. On a federal level, There are safeguards we can add and perplexity to trading stock for congressmen. One such rule is the disclosure rule. This makes it a slight pain to invest. A second rule I propose is committee conflict rule, declare stocks that are in conflict with a committee hearing, and offer recusal to the chair each time on a hearing with a potential conflict. A third rule is prohibition on potential stock trades after a committee hearing for 90 days or until hearing is published. And do not disclose details of the hearing with anyone until it is published. These rules add pains and discouragement to stock trades. But outright bans are not there.
gjsman-1000 3y ago
For me, I'm not sure why there is a "Ms. Nancy Pelosi," and a "Nancy Pelosi," that both have trade activity. (Nancy Pelosi is interesting. She entered Congress worth about ~3-4 million. Now she is worth $100 million, give or take $20 million depending on the estimate. Interesting. I'm not saying it's Insider Trading, but the probability...)
- pc86 3y ago
  Pelosi is literally the poster-child for Congressional insider trading.
- HWR_14 3y ago
  Wow, Nancy Pelosi is interesting. She entered Congress 36 years ago. If she put $3MM in the S&P index when she joined Congress, and never touched it, it would be worth $108.66MM today. If anything, that's a clear argument she isn't insider trading. I always assumed she was a huge inside trader making a ton of money. Meanwhile, her husband is a VC, and probably makes a good deal of money for them as well.
  - carlmr 3y ago
    >and never touched it, Didn't she touch it though? A lot of people would be multimillionaires if they only put money in and never took money out. The question is, with what she did invest, and the money she did take out, would she still be that wealthy.
    - HWR_14 3y ago
      I have no idea if she touched it. Her husband makes a lot of money and she makes a good amount as well. Also, that's the lower bound by what people estimated she had when she entered congress and close to the upper bound of what she would be worth today. But it's entirely possible that someone in the SF area with a SV husband beat the S&P without resorting to insider trading on public markets. Heck, the house she bought has probably beaten the S&P. To reiterate, I always assumed she was insider trading. These numbers are making me question that.

jakearmitage 3y ago

I wish there was a tool that allowed me to follow Congress as if it was an index. Automatically buying and selling what they buy and sell. Right from my Fidelity or something.

nickpeterson 3y ago
If it got popular enough, congressmen would heavily buy a stock their spouse has short term options on, why not?
minkzilla 3y ago
NANC and KRUZ ETFs track democrats and republican holdings respectively. A word of caution: there are articles online that have looked at individual senators and most of them unperformed compared to the SP500
shagmin 3y ago
Someone with some spare cash for seed funding could file with the SEC to create an ETF that does exactly this.

rwmj 3y ago

Does a "Congress tracker fund" make money? What with all the rumoured insider trading ...

jjoonathan 3y ago
NANC and KRUZ are the ticker symbols (I wish I was joking)
- smallerfish 3y ago
  Interesting that NANC is doing so much better than KRUZ. Any ideas why?
  - nordsieck 3y ago
    > Interesting that NANC is doing so much better than KRUZ. Any ideas why? Presumably because they're on different committees. Or have different friends. Just like existing law, pending legislation is too vast for any one person to know it all.
  - ckardat123 3y ago
    Nancy Pelosi holds a ton of Microsoft stock, I believe up to $25M last time I checked. I haven't checked the NANC holdings, but her Microsoft position has definitely been carrying our Nancy Pelosi Strategy on Quiver.
ckardat123 3y ago
Pretty small out-of-sample window, but we built a trading strategy on top of congressional trading data and it's done well since we launched it last year. You can see the backtest performance here, but the holdings and advanced metrics are behind a paywall (apologies in advance): https://www.quiverquant.com/strategies/ https://www.quiverquant.com/strategies/ As others have pointed out, there is a delay between when the trades are made and when they are disclosed and our strategy is able to act on them. However, this is somewhat countered by the fact that politicians tend to hold stocks for long periods of time. There are definitely some examples of politicians trading a stock right before a massive market moving event, but I think they are generally looking at a longer time horizon when they are investing.
aketchum 3y ago
I think there is a delay on stock disclosures, like they only have to disclose purchase/sale once a quarter or something which makes it hard to profitably copy their trading.

smcin 3y ago

Sen Cynthia Loomis (R-WY) [EDIT: 'Lummis'] doesn't show up on the list (for stocks), is she still the biggest crypto trader? https://www.marketwatch.com/story/congresss-crypto-traders-the-u-s-lawmakers-who-buy-and-sell-digital-currencies-11643983477 https://www.marketwatch.com/story/congresss-crypto-traders-t...

ckardat123 3y ago
The list on the homepage just shows recent transactions. You can search for individuals on top to see their full transaction list. Lummis bought up to $100K of Bitcoin in 2021: https://www.quiverquant.com/congresstrading/politician/Cynthia%20Lummis https://www.quiverquant.com/congresstrading/politician/Cynth...
- smcin 3y ago
  I had already searched your site and found nothing. But that was because I misspelled her name as 'Loomis' not 'Lummis'. Anyway when I search under correct name, I only find 2 trades, from 2021. She really had no other trades?
  - ckardat123 3y ago
    Yeah looks like it. Here's where you can search for the source disclosures - only seeing two trades on her periodic transaction reports: https://efdsearch.senate.gov/search/ https://efdsearch.senate.gov/search/

carabiner 3y ago

Also https://www.capitoltrades.com/ https://www.capitoltrades.com/

PartiallyTyped 3y ago

Unusualwhales (not affiliated) does that too!

ed_balls 3y ago

TBH will the regulation change much? If congressmen won't be allow to own stock, they will use proxy (wife, siblings, parents, in-laws).

ckardat123 3y ago
I think that if there were a law in place that made it illegal for congressmen to trade, it would be easier to catch insider trading because they would be forced to trade by proxy like you mentioned. It's really hard to prove someone traded off of insider information if they make a decision to buy/sell for themselves. If they don't tell anyone else why they made the trade, you don't really have any proof that it was made off of material non-public information. If a congressman is forced to ask someone else to trade for them, they might be careless and you might be able to find evidence via text messages or phone records. The last time a U.S. Representative got convicted for insider trading, it was because he called his son to tell him to trade a stock that he had insider information on: https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-congressman-christopher-collins-sentenced-insider-trading-scheme-and-lying https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/former-congressman-chri...
- pc86 3y ago
  One thing I've always wondered about this is how to handle circumstantial evidence. Let's say you have a relative who may have insider information on a stock. You talk sometimes but not regularly. They call you (as they occasionally do) the day before you trade a stock and it performs favorably within a short time period. Are you now in a position where you have to prove a negative? Are there people in prison right now because of exactly this type of occurrence, or is it so circumstantial that it's not even pursued unless there is additional evidence, e.g. you always buy $500-1k in stock but after this call you buy $10k in options or something.
  - rrrrrrrrrrrryan 3y ago
    According to one of my finance professors in university, it's somewhat tough to actually get convicted for insider trading, and there are certain circles where everyone does it. The people who do get convicted are usually those who were being particularly egregious or who pissed someone off enough to rat them out. For example, Martha Stewart got convicted because her assistant (whom she regularly called a "little shit") decided to testify against her.

samsolomon 3y ago

Love the font choice! Never heard of Rubik, but I like stocky letters with a tall x-height. Kind of reminds me of Colfax. https://processtypefoundry.com/fonts/colfax/ https://processtypefoundry.com/fonts/colfax/ I might add the following for a slightly crisper look: text-rendering: optimizeLegibility; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased;

ckardat123 3y ago
Thanks! Appreciate the suggestion, I'll check out how that looks.

nashashmi 3y ago

The rules on Congressman trading should be coming from their districts and states that they represent. it could possibly hurt the quality of congressmen and senators that run for election if this rule is implemented at a federal level.

pc86 3y ago
How so? One, there are no district-specific rules for members of Congress. But even assuming states are legally able to restrict federal officials' trading, why is it better to have some states regulate it and some states not compared to a consistent federal rule one way or the other? "Good people won't run for Senate if we don't let them trade stocks on the information they get" doesn't really make that much sense to me.
- nashashmi 3y ago
  Apparently there was a state rule for the NJ senator that he could not run for president while in senate. They changed it for Cory Booker. So apparently it is possible to add rules for senators and congressman. On a federal level, There are safeguards we can add and perplexity to trading stock for congressmen. One such rule is the disclosure rule. This makes it a slight pain to invest. A second rule I propose is committee conflict rule, declare stocks that are in conflict with a committee hearing, and offer recusal to the chair each time on a hearing with a potential conflict. A third rule is prohibition on potential stock trades after a committee hearing for 90 days or until hearing is published. And do not disclose details of the hearing with anyone until it is published. These rules add pains and discouragement to stock trades. But outright bans are not there.

gjsman-1000 3y ago

For me, I'm not sure why there is a "Ms. Nancy Pelosi," and a "Nancy Pelosi," that both have trade activity. (Nancy Pelosi is interesting. She entered Congress worth about ~3-4 million. Now she is worth $100 million, give or take $20 million depending on the estimate. Interesting. I'm not saying it's Insider Trading, but the probability...)

pc86 3y ago
Pelosi is literally the poster-child for Congressional insider trading.
HWR_14 3y ago
Wow, Nancy Pelosi is interesting. She entered Congress 36 years ago. If she put $3MM in the S&P index when she joined Congress, and never touched it, it would be worth $108.66MM today. If anything, that's a clear argument she isn't insider trading. I always assumed she was a huge inside trader making a ton of money. Meanwhile, her husband is a VC, and probably makes a good deal of money for them as well.
- carlmr 3y ago
  >and never touched it, Didn't she touch it though? A lot of people would be multimillionaires if they only put money in and never took money out. The question is, with what she did invest, and the money she did take out, would she still be that wealthy.
  - HWR_14 3y ago
    I have no idea if she touched it. Her husband makes a lot of money and she makes a good amount as well. Also, that's the lower bound by what people estimated she had when she entered congress and close to the upper bound of what she would be worth today. But it's entirely possible that someone in the SF area with a SV husband beat the S&P without resorting to insider trading on public markets. Heck, the house she bought has probably beaten the S&P. To reiterate, I always assumed she was insider trading. These numbers are making me question that.