3 ms·
>> In theory, the trading reaction should have begun in New York several milliseconds before it began in Chicago, because information takes several more millise
by hrasyid 13y ago
>> In theory, the trading reaction should have begun in New York several milliseconds before it began in Chicago, because information takes several more milliseconds to travel the longer distance.
Just curious, how much difference could this "several milliseconds" have made?
- dingaling 13y ago> Just curious, how much difference could this "several milliseconds" have made? Most high-frequency trading systems could actually execute an entire tranche of selling in that epoch. Consider the Hibernian Express fibre-optic link from NY to London, commissioned this year. A quarter of a billion dollars spent to shave 6 milliseconds off the transit time.
- 001sky 13y agoA quarter of a billion dollars spent to shave 6 milliseconds off the transit time. Price of front running.
- ballard 13y agoImagine the pressure to reach a 4-5x IRR on that. It would seem conspicous outlay could be competitive to signal a defensible business model where such outlay doesn't actually return itself but deters competition.
- krexit 13y agoThe article stated that as much as 600 million USD in trades were made in that 7ms window. The S&P 500 rose 1.2% as a result of the announcement, giving an essentially riskless gross profit of around 7.2 million USD, if one were to buy before and sell after.
- hrasyid 13y agoit rose 1.2% in 7ms?