5 ms·
> the increase in activity seems to have come from just two trades. its interesting how nobody not even a bot was interested in copy-trading that, most likely
by yieldcrv 3y ago
> the increase in activity seems to have come from just two trades.
its interesting how nobody not even a bot was interested in copy-trading that, most likely due to the incredibly low volume, kept everyone else far far away from that ticker
only 15,000 shares traded today. paltry.
curious if they, were they able to cover that short
- quickthrowman 3y ago> curious if they, were they able to cover that short Volume for EIS on 10/9 (first market day after the attack) was ~341k shares, it’s possible they were on the buy side of 2/3rds of those trades, I’m guessing there was not a lack of sellers on 10/9.
- next_xibalba 3y ago> copy-trading Is this a common bot strategy? I’ve never heard of this (not that I would—I only casually follow finance).
- belter 3y agoI only know of two similar strategies: - Check Goldman Sachs recommendations and do the opposite. - Hear Jim Cramer recommendations and do the opposite. These two never failed to make money.
- _benj 3y agoI don’t think is a bot thing but a people thing… when there’s a sudden grow in volume whoever sees that assumes that whoever took that position knows something that they don’t know and thus taking a similar position is often a “sensible” action, even if only to hedge against unknowns… Source: best friend trades for a living
- yieldcrv 3y agoand its easy to code a bot for it to be a bot thing far easier than any high frequency trading