Proponents argue HFT provides liquidity and increased market efficiency. Market efficiency relies on extreme competition between investors that are highly inte

Proponents argue HFT provides liquidity and increased market efficiency. Market efficiency relies on extreme competition between investors that are highly intelligent and able to make quick decisions. When you can sum up much of those decisions in algorithms, what better way to deliver competition than HFT? Opponents argue markets were efficient enough pre-HFT and that any benefits delivered by HFT are more 'academic' than practical. Opponents also argue that the level of uncertainty ("inexperience") with HFT brings more risks than argued benefits, as well as all of the "usual" criticisms of 'trading' vs. 'investing'. As you may be able to tell, I myself am sitting on the fence on this issue, albeit with both feet pointing towards the opponents' side.