4 ms·
If a person is successful in one business should we subject ourselves to his idiotic views on another business? By definition they can’t go into an equity unle
by asto 14y ago
If a person is successful in one business should we subject ourselves to his idiotic views on another business?
By definition they can’t go into an equity unless there already is liquidity.
HFTs who are usually market makers [1] maintain liquidity in the market by constantly having buy/sell orders open for many instruments/scrips. In their absence, a counter trade may not exist for matching against when you or I put out a sell/buy order. Being able to sell/buy a scrip/instrument within seconds is a valuable service that investors appreciate. In India, the securities exchange regulator mandates that all market makers make a minimum value of trades per day. I am not sure of the exact current values in each segment but it's in the order of millions of rupees. This is how regulators create conditions of liquidity so that markets are nicer to trade in especially for retail investors.
The missing link in all the discussions is: What is the purpose of the stock market?
The stock market can be divided into a primary market and a secondary market. The primary market exists to finance companies. When they IPO, cash is generated which they can use to fund business activities. The secondary market exists to encourage purchases in the primary market and to efficiently discover the price of the securities. Without a liquid secondary market, very few investors would be interested in a primary market.
HFT is only doing what was already done since many years ago manually. Humans make the same mistakes computers are being programmed to make today. In their defence, they execute exactly as asked - they feel no fear, doubt or greed - unlike a human trader . Should we treat them as being harmful because computers make mistakes at a significantly faster rate? HFT is a still nascent concept. With sufficient regulation, we will likely be able to get rid of the problems and retain the advantages.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_maker http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_maker
- JonnieCache 14y ago>hould we treat them as being harmful because computers make mistakes at a significantly faster rate? Yes. Significantly doesn't really cover it. When you increase the rate of an activity by many orders of magnitude and put an AI behind it, it becomes a totally different activity, even if the mechanics are notionally the same.