3 ms·
I believe the exchanges have no interest in "solving" HFT since they make a good amount of dinero around it. IEX has made a business out of 1 second delay (700m
by guiomie 12y ago
I believe the exchanges have no interest in "solving" HFT since they make a good amount of dinero around it. IEX has made a business out of 1 second delay (700ms actually).
- kasey_junk 12y agoIEX has made a business out of being a dark pool explicitly designed for buy side hedge funds to be able to avoid market forces. The 700ms delay is the least of those features & is more of a marketing gimic.
- minimax 12y agoThe IEX order entry delay is 350 microseconds (one way). Considerably less than even a millisecond.
- guiomie 12y agoMy bad. It does say micro second on wikipedia, and I used the wrong unit abbreviation.
- yummyfajitas 12y agoHFTs nearly all provide liquidity rather than take it, which means that the exchange pays them to trade. You are simply wrong - the exchange loses money on most HFTs. https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-arca/NYSE_Arca_Marketplace_Fees.pdf https://www.nyse.com/publicdocs/nyse/markets/nyse-arca/NYSE_... http://nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=PriceListTrading2 http://nasdaqtrader.com/Trader.aspx?id=PriceListTrading2 Ask yourself: why would the exchanges pay market makers to provide liquidity?
- crdoconnor 12y agoHFTs provide far more liquidity than is ever needed during normal periods and during periods of market distress (when liquidity is sorely needed) they suddenly and sharply withdraw that liquidity from the market.
- kasey_junk 12y agoJust to be clear, in market circles removing liquidity means a specific thing. It means, crossing a spread to buy or sell existing orders. HFTs do not do this in times of market distress. You can make an argument that HFT market makers stop providing liquidity during strange market conditions, but they do not "remove" it.