You're now on the archive server. Commenting has been disabled.
Technical Reading: Adverse Selection vs. Opportunistic Savings in Dark Aggregators
From the Conclusion:
- Avoid using passive strategies or manually managing tactical limits early in the trade, especially in high volatility markets when trading non-discretionary orders
- Use dark aggregators tactically with limited exposure times
- When using opportunistic algorithms or trading tools, it is important to control the participation rate. Ideally this can achieved pre-emptively through predictive analytics, but ex-post control measures like imposing minimum and maximum participation rates already lead to significant improvements.
- Exploit the alpha gleaned from the participation rate anomaly. On a rise in the dark fill rate, consider pulling back to passive strategies; when dark aggregators run dry consider engaging in the displayed markets to keep to a reasonable schedule.
- Use opportunistic algorithms or dark aggregators in situations with low adverse information risk
Fun evening reading: Adverse Selection vs. Opportunistic Savings in Dark Aggregators, courtesy of Pipeline and AllianceBernstein
»
- 4948 reads
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
OMG.... SO over the head of 95% - That's why "I Love You Man"...
Dude - The more I read the worse my headache becomes.... Anyone with a Wiki dictionary out there for the lingo?????
My understanding is that bill didn't pass in the senate. Nevertheless, .gov will take care of deposits somehow. Can you imagine the chaos if they didn't?
To attack anything other than chart reading as BS is, however, unreasonable.
A great paper and demonstration of LACK of common sense, or any sense at all....
I wonder whether people who entrust their wealth/cash to these guys think about what they are doing, unless it is not their wealth that is fueling the process.
Oh well, the more of those the better off we are, I can sleep better at night.
Say whuh?
Spreads are going to be renamed. They will be called the swap goatse.
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*
g_____________________________________________g
o_/_____\_____________\____________/____\______o
a|_______|_____________\__________|______|_____a
t|_______`______________|_________|_______:____t
s`________|_____________|________\|_______|____s
e_\_______|_/_______/___\\\___--___\\_______:____e
x__\______\/____--~~__________~--__|_\_____|____x
*___\______\_-~____________________~-_\____|___*
g____\______\__________--------_______\|___|______g
o______\_____\______//_________(_(__>__\___|____o
a_______\______C____)_________(_(____>__|__/___a
t_______/\_|___C_____)/_______\_(_____>__|_/_____t
s______/_/\|___C_____)________|__(___>___/__\____s
e_____|___(____C_____)\______/__//__/_/_____\____e
x_____|____\__|_____\\_________//_(__/_______|___x
*____|_\____\____)___`----___--'______________|___*
g____|__\______________\_______/___________/____g
o___|______________/____|_____|__\__________|___o
a___|_____________|____/_______\__\__________|__a
t___|__________/_/_____|________|__\__________|__t
s___|_________/_/______\__/\___/____|__________|_s
e__|___________/________|____|______\_________|_e
x__|__________|_________|____|_______|_________|x
*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*_g_o_a_t_s_e_x_*
...You had that comin' for bringin' goatse up on ZH.
What works today, will work less well tomorrow, and won't work at all next week.
Declining efficacy in predictive algo's is extremely well defined -- and is in fact, the only predictable aspect of prediction.
Page 13 is the only page you need to read people. As with all non-zero sum games, the problem is that the sum must eventually approach zero. i.e.: The more players manage tactical limits early in the trade, the more adverse selection will occur.
But like most strategies -- empiricism isn't the point. Putting on a good show for one's clients, is.
--Popo
Correction: "like most *published* stragegies...:
--Popo
15 pages on how to obfuscate the obvious!
Anyone have a general reference for building (realtime, multi-threaded, distributed, C++, etc.) HFT systems? I teach a software course on these topics and I think the students might get a kick out of building a simple HFT system. Might even motivate them to learn something.
There are three parts:
Input - Depends on algorithm you are using (maybe frontrunning, in case of GS)
Simulation - This is the algorithm, which takes the RT data and does the "prediction."
Execution - FIX protocol
You won't get anyone to disclose their algorithm and FIX protocol is pretty standard and available online.
>Input - Depends on algorithm you are using (maybe
>frontrunning, in case of GS)
Yes, some of the students will be allowed to
front run; we'll see if they win the game.
>Simulation - This is the algorithm, which takes
>the RT data ..."
Any idea where I can get some files of RT data?
Maybe there's a source for logged trading
transactions that are used to test these
type of systems?
> " ... and does the "prediction."
I'll do something simple. The focus is on the
architecture/programming.
>Execution - FIX protocol
I see. That helps!
You can look/search for tick data online. Exchanges usually have it but I'm not sure if you have to pay for it. Good luck.
td posted a link yesterday --- i think it was nasdaq. link was to text files that were so big my computer froze. i assume tou could use that data.
that's interesting
nothing will change. We just
good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions
The 'easiest' thing to do would be a liquidity provisioning or rebate generating strategy. There is no real alpha model associated with such a strategy. The goal is to provide liquidity on an exchange that gives rebates (usually around 20-25 mils). If you can provide more often than you take liquidity, you make the difference in rebates/fees as well as some spread capture. Its essentially implied market making without taking too complicated of a view on directionality.
Even with a such a 'simple' algorithm, there is a fair amount of analysis required. The algorithm must be constantly analyzing the spread and depth of book on a liquid security, which requires a very dense data set and tick data is not cheap.
How to build the "Perfect Predator", I don't think so. The military is quite adept.
If teaching a class, I would talk to Interactive Brokers about setting up test accounts, and use their Java client and local API for getting quotes and placing trades.
Unlikely given the simulated environment and how it works that any of the students models will actually make money, but it is a safe way to learn, and FIX is basically a disaster to try and teach.
Trading through IB is slow (100s of ms on average), but since no students will put real capital at risk, that shouldn't be an issue.
Not sure where to get historical data. A reasonably cheap source is NxCore, but likely far too expensive for a class setting.
Any high frequency strategy would fail with that kind of latency. It doesn't matter whether its a simulation or not. Once you're talking about that kind of time round trip there is no way to implement any of the strategies used for HFT (auto-quote, correlation, exchange/latency arbitrage, pairs, etc...).
Well, it wouldn't be competitive with what we both may think of as HF strategies, however there are arbitrages (statisitcal and non-statistical) that do exist long enough to make money trading through IB.
That's true. But those kind of strategies do not require the low-latency, distributed, multi-threaded, etc... c++ type of architecture that the class experiment was trying to use.
I'm not trying to be antagonistic... I think you tend to have some of the more well-reasoned posts on this site. What it comes down to is that designing, testing, and executing a high frequency trading platform (even in a test environment) is FAR beyond the scope of any programming course. It requires a number of experts from various fields including hardware design, data path optimization, and market micro-structure.
I think we are basically in violent agreement.
I've however given some thought as to how I would teach a course on alg. trading - and IB always comes out on top. Of course, that is not HF trading, and it doesn't deal with the myriad of very hard technical problems that need to be addressed to turn a 150ms latency application into a sub 1ms application... but I was guessing that the person asking the question was really just interested in automated trading strategies... since going after a HF strategy in a classroom environment seems unlikely.
I do think that it would be great to have an advanced operating systems class focus on building device drivers to load Level-2 quotes into blocks of shared memory... but that project in and of itself would likely take most of the semester, and noone would get to use the data.
Agreed :)
I think that in the future algorithmic trading will certainly be a subject that is taught, perhaps at the graduate level. I think the difficulty, as with most cutting edge finance topics, is that the people who have the knowledge to teach such subjects are working in the private sector and guard their information pretty closely.
As algorithmic trading matures, and some of the more basic practices become standardized, this will probably change. You would be doing the academic sector a great service if you were to get the ball rolling. Some of the financial engineering programs teach the theory of algorithmic trading but implementation seems under-represented.
use database system
nothing will change. We just
good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions
Use an agent based market model coupled with network simulators. That's what I did.
I'm gitting too old to figger this darn high falutin finance crap out. Thanks for the tips from the conculsion to let me know how totally clueless I am.
Knowing that you don't know, but are attempting to discern and learn places you in the top 10% of society as a whole.
Keep on keepin' on and before you know it you will be understanding it a bit more each day.
@#37509;
when you quit trying t figure it out is when your too old...since finding Z.H. my head has been exploding,,,but in a good way...
me too
All these scientific approaches to trading are a total waste of time.
In fact, managing big money is nearly impossible these days, given all the tricks being pulled daily.
Small time traders like me working on a 4-year old laptop using common sense and thinking like a criminal at Goldman Sachs can successfully trade without the need of these Dark Pools and analytics.
Just have to act like a street fighter and stay nimble.
I doubt they ever put on a real trade past their first ten losers.
Agreed, It sorta reminds me of the fast footed salesman. The financial types need to move away from the math. They get lost in their own conundrum. I know - sounds rediculous.
You get to take whatever prices are set by the big players. But if you are managing billions of dollars you have to consider the execution problem
nothing will change. We just
good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions
For small time traders there is no need for dark pools. That's true. But what, as a small time trader, qualifies you to comment on the difficulties of managing large sums of money? It amazes me how day traders on this site with personal accounts of a few $100k or even a few $mm think they're experts on institutional trading. Just because I know how to throw a baseball does not qualify me to play for the Yankees, or even the Nationals for that matter. As a day trader you have no concept of what is involved in trading a large portfolio.
Re-read his post. He thinks like a criminal at Goldman Sachs with billions of money to spend daily.
Different regulators probably have different examiners that show up to check out the books on different days. I mean, if they do stuff like that anymore...
Interesting, but I think they are missing out on other important factors such as eye-of-newt and opossum tails. The only real results I've gotten with dark aggregators is limited relief from lithium boils. But anyone with good eyes and a pile of squirrel entrails could tell you that.
"Psychos and Market Makers", another interesting paper by the same people, Pipeline Financial, probably intel.
“Pipeline gives buy-side traders a unique control advantage in fragmented, volatile and predator-laced markets by using prediction science, encryption technology, and real world experience. This advantage enables traders to efficiently drive orders to completion - on their terms.”
"prediction science". Reminds me of Jumbo Shrimp or Government Intelligence. A bit of a misnomer. There is a reason the weather man can't get out any farther than he does.
This will explain how Wall Street really works, in simple terms of baseball cards.
"What effect will the rumor have on the price of baseball cards?"
The Great Baseball Card Scheme with John Houseman:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v6PIBt1SjjI
I have sat in front of screens trading my own money using my own algo based software for 13 years. Prior to that I developed the strategy which took 7+ years of failures. Its how I support my family. Over so many years of watching tick by tick trading I can say that nothing has changed. The shit you see is no differnt than the shit I have seen for years. Ramp ups last 20 minutes? Whats new? Running shit stocks 25% on an August afternoon what is new? Endless grind ups with no fucking reason for weeks on end fueled by massive liquidity injections. Its all the same. The market behaves as it always has folks. Hope and fear. Yea yea the script has changed, the characters are different, but the underlying storyline is the same as it ever was.
Did you write your own algo based software... and if so how did you link it into a trading platform? Just curious... my background is in programming... so I wanted to file away your answer for possible future use.
#37636,
Hello,
You are a f*@&ed in the head. You are a failure. What part of "unprecedented" don't you understand. Records being set to the negative, There is absolutely nothing that is laizze fair about what is happening, Except to a failure, losing Tool who writes "Ho-hum, been there done that".
Posting drunk, we've all done it. : )
Take it easy man, what he's doing isn't that different that other people who trade, most likely with the same tools, just automated.
He's not the guy frontrunning his clients or hunting limits.
In my defense, I am married and have four kids. My kids are great and I do pretty well for myself. I may be fucked in the head but I guess I dont see myself as a failure. It seems I wasnt clear on the context. I trade. I have been through many crashes. This past one was very bad I agree. But the day to day trading isnt different. And this is my job. I find it interesting that people feel are capable of such "directness" on blogs. I would be surprised if you would say that to me in person. You might disagree but likely you wouldnt act like such a fucking asshole.
Code is written in C++. Lots of platforms allow dll interface. Indicators are a losing game. They will always fail eventually. Patterns will fail. Volume studies will fail. Only thing that wont is price.
True that. Nice to hear your experiences are similar to mine, I haven't been at this as long.
If these guys are right, HF market makers and rebate chasers, and flash gordons are costing mutual fund investos billions...they jump in between real investors and charge a toll to rent their liquidity for a few hours. (Do the math.)
It looks like Pipeline and Alliance found a way to beat these guys at their own game....good luck fellas!
Um.... did you actually read the paper? It has nothing to do with the market makers and liquidity providers. Its about high frequency arb and pinging strategies that have short-term alpha insight. Get your facts straight.
Seems to me the market has just become a platform for theorical ideas of maths and programming to be put to use.
and just confirms the fact that things like consumer confidence, yields, price to earnings, or even lack of them have no bearing whatsoever on share prices any longer.
People, rather people who are in charge of the computers that trade only do so on pure mathematical basis and let others... mug punters, so called investors ... think that the market is still working in that way.
How else would you get a market that is trading at record high valuations, gone up more than the great depression, companies that are basically bankrupt but double in share price? Because HFT is so dominant in the market place, it has completely destroyed proper price discover as it can bully prices to what ever the computer programmer sets.
As long as the market goes up there will be little done about it and I can see valuations of shares going into a Super Bubble with shorters and logical traders blood littered along the way
Tell me... what is a "logical trader"? Is it a matter of time-scale to you? If someone enters and exits a position twice a day, are they a "logical trader"? What about once a month, or 1,000 times a day? Where do you draw the line?
And what about your so-called "investors"? Do you use that interchangeably with "buy and hold"? You do realize that once the shares have been offered, any trades that occur are just a shuffling around of money? The company is not getting any new "investors", just different partial owners of the stock. If I buy 1,000 shares of stock on the open market and hold them for a year I'm no more of an "investor" than the guy who bought 1,000 shares and sold them 5ms later.
a logical trader to me is someone who buys shares for fundamental reasons, because of the companies earnings, yield and growth prospects.
Shares that are rubbish, junk and have dreadful results can soar because computer programs pick out the high short interest and know they can get a forced closure of the shorts who think the company isn't worth the price it is trading at on earnings basis.
The computer programs only pick out the fact that there is a high short interest nothing else
and also it is making a mockery of pension funds and the like.
It is all well and good as long as the market is going on on fumes. But fumes only last just so long
and another thing... at the moment people or computers are spending over 140 dollars for companies that produce 1 dollar of earnings. Sounds a bit like a bad deal to me!
if its a bad deal then don't buy it. how is it any of your business if someone else chooses to value a security differently?
Pension funds require no outside help in making a mockery of themselves.
So you wouldn't consider a trend-follower to be a "logical trader"? In your definition the only "logical traders" out there are fundamental securities analysts?
How are you so sure that short interest is the only factor used by quantitative trading methods? I can tell you, for a fact, that is not the case. Plenty of quant models use fundamental factors, along with technical indicators and market microstructure insight to make decisions.
This sounds like an example of someone who is bitter because they've lost money, but remains unwilling to consider that they just made a poor trading decision. So the strategies that are currently making money must be wrong, while the losing trader is still somehow right.
Are you familiar with the saying "The market can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent"? This statement came along well before the advent of high frequency trading.
But then there is the bond market, whose judgment will be swift and devastating.
Watch corp bonds. The turning point is *so* much closer than people realize. And when the bond market turns, markets as a whole will turn with such suddenness and such ferocity that the bulls will suddenly find themselves castrated, an iron spike driven through their skulls, ground into patties, cooked medium rare, and served for lunch to those prescient investors who refused to toke the crackpipe.
There is a strange and entirely silly notion which has bugun to go unquestioned (even by those traders I used to respect) that markets can be driven upwards in perpetuity. This will, of course, prove disastrously wrong for those math-challenged adherents of such foolishness.
HFT, while indeed a powerful mover of markets, is (contrary to conspiracists' beliefs) a force with multiple masters. Its delta cuts both ways.
When this dirigible goes down it will go down with such fire and obliterating force that Bernanke will instantly transform from history teacher to history lesson.
But enough bear porn for today... Keep your powder dry and come back for the opening act in October. Then play as you want until the main act starts in '10.
--Popo
The paper really deals in pure strategies, so the strategies themselves are exposed to an "arm race" - point counterpoint - cycle. One can probably do better using mixed (randomized) strategies.
So when an opportunistic (aggressive) strategy is randomly selected to trade 50% ADV of an illiquid stock, that is an acceptable outcome in your theory?
The mixed strategies (which are exte
nsions of pure ones) - back to Nash -
are guaranteed to do at least as well as pure ones.
The actual randomization depends on the
structure of the payoff function and distribution of
information.
Mixed strategies certainly do not come with any guarantee of improved execution. That's a weird assumption to make. They only outperform when used intelligently, which is easier said than done.
I guess we are in violent agreement, and yes
it is a lot more computationally complex to
arrive at a superior mixed strategy.
Probably this needs to wait super-super-computer a
or "almost complete information" regarding
the other players -- i guess front-running is not
quite almost complete information.
With regard to the argument of pure vs. mixed execution strategies what it comes down to is that yes, a mixed strategy can outperform. But the requirements to almost (never completely) guarantee this out-performance are that the designer have what approaches a short term alpha model. At the point which the mixed execution strategy approaches truly significant performance gains, we're no longer talking about execution. We're talking about a high frequency alpha strategy. And thats comparing apples to oranges. Now, a mixed strategy where execution is still the main goal rather than alpha capture (though alpha is still a secondary consideration) still requires intelligent application rather than randomized selection.
I do not get the last sentence. Any pure
strategy is a mixed one with prob one.
If any "intelligent app" is a pure one
what makes randomization involving
two (or more) "intelligent apps" less
intelligent than a single one?
"Any pure strategy is a mixed one with prob one."
Huh? Let's make sure we've got our definitions correct here. A pure strategy is one which executes with a singular focus such as a schedule (vwap/pov/twap/etc) or passivity (post only) or aggressive liquidity seeking. A mixed strategy is one which makes intraday decisions about which regimes to switch between on the fly.
Now, in order for a mixed strategy to always outperform a pure one the strategy must guarantee the correct switching decision is made almost every single time. That kind of predictive ability is completely wasted on an execution strategy, because it has a direct application to pure alpha capture. No such mixed execution strategy exists. So to say that a mixed strategy always outperforms a pure one makes no sense in the real world.
The mixed strategies that do exist are imperfect, to say the least. They provide certain opportunities for better execution, but only when used in the right situations (as I keep saying).
If your argument is that in a perfect utopian world there exists some theoretical construct that makes all execution decisions flawlessly, then I suppose you're correct. However, whats the point of that argument?
How utopian was Nash in late forties
when the real optimization waited untile
early seventies - by traversing some polyhedra vertices
to get a feasible epsilon-optimal solutions?
What does that have to do with mixed execution strategies?
time and computing power will make these
strategies feasible
Well... that's open for speculation. But personally I disagree. The markets do not provide for a closed-form solution. There is always irrationality. If time and computing power will one day solve that problem then the markets as we know them will cease to exist.
Fair enough. Yes, no closed-form solution
just getting within some epsilon better than
others.
But then that epsilon becomes an arms race in and of itself. Its a race to see who can approximate "perfection" better.
I think so. The difference is that without mixed strategies
the countermoves are more predictable
and
unless one is lucky there is an epsilon barrier
that cannot be breached.
LOL...pure BS...big waste of time. I trade probabilities on suport/resistance simple and profitable. And I'm doing it for the last 20 years or so. Get out of the matrix folks ;)
The article deals with institutional trading. When you're trading 100, 1000, or even 10000 shares at a time on technical analysis indicators you're right, this article has no application. But when you need 500,000 shares of exposure you don't always have the convenience of executing your entire order at once.
For situations like that, the article has direct relevance. Are your day trading strategies scalable to a $5bn portfolio containing hundreds of securities? Its a completely different world, with completely different obstacles. Just because this article doesn't apply to your style of trading does not make it a waste of time.
Again ...pure BS !!
I use to trade Forex for a bank buddy, a BIG bank, and as long as we had proprietary software to manage risk etc you would be amazed if you could see how simple (naked) our charts are.
Those illusions are created for sheeple in their way to be slaughtered
You traded FOREX. Completely different market buddy (the article is about equities). This article is not about "when" to buy and sell (which you use your charts for), its about "how". The stock market is a complicated place these days. Maybe this kinda stuff didn't matter 20 years ago.
LOL.....I can see that you are probably a newbie. A "chart" is a "chart" does not matter what. As long as you are trading in the plahet earth against other human beings a chart will allways be a CHART !!
Anyways...just keep believing in this kind of BS guys like you are made to feed the account of guys like me ;)
That's a quaint thought. So your experience trading forex has now made you an expert on the developments in equity market structure over the past few years? I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you over the internet. Its always easy to act like a tough guy when you're sitting in front of your computer. What I can tell you is that I trade a large equity portfolio at a buy-side institution and we're consistently profitable. The issues raised in the article are the types of things that we think about, because when you're turning over $100mm+ every day saving a few basis points on execution actually matters. If its not applicable to you, thats fine. But don't pretend to be an expert just because you have one trading style that works for you.
Don't embarrass yourself in public my friend :0.
I do believe you trade equities because equity traders are known to be..well...not very smart.
A chart is just an expression of how human beings interact. I trade forex, futures, equities, etc and let me tell you again a CHART is a CHART they all obey the same laws.
Buddy... you keep harping on charts. Do charts tell you where you can find liquidity? Do charts tell you whats going on with the limit order books on multiple venues? I agree with you that a chart is a chart, in the sense that it can indicate good entry/exit points WHEN you can get your entire trade done at a point in time. But thats not usually possible.
Anyway, this argument is silly. Your need to use hyperbole in order to make your points doesn't do anything to support your argument. You rely strictly on charts. Neat. If that works for you then I'm happy for you. But you seem convinced that you're the smartest guy here and anyone who doesn't agree with you must be "well... not very smart." So you've been trading for over 20 years, you used to work at a "BIG bank". If you're the genius you claim to be, why aren't you retired and enjoying life rather than scouring finance blogs and day trading charts?
First I'm not a genius.
Second I'm 41 and I love trading so I'm not retiring anytime soon.
Third I trade from my house,I will never go back to trade for a institution again trading at home gives me the money and the flexibilty to do whatever I want with my time.
Fourth, I enjoy going where people are. In supermarkets, stores. malls etc (including chat rooms) I find the best economical indicators anyone can find.
And Again I do it because I like :)
All extremely reasonable answers. And for some people, worrying about things like implementation shortfall, adverse selection, and opportunity cost are reasonable pursuits that translate directly into very large amounts of money at the end of the day. To attack anything other than chart reading as BS is, however, unreasonable. The equity markets in the last few years have become extremely fractured and chaotic. Even the most traditional , old-school traders are using algorithms in order to find liquidity and get the best prices they can.
There is absolutely no basis in reality for any of the prices right now.
A chart is not a chart.
Try doing TA on a 2x inverse ETF without looking at the underlying metric.
That'd be a neat trick.
--Popo.
Dude, forex is as liquid and large as it gets. Apples and oranges.
--Popo
LOL...ok, got back here just to see that people are still trying to prove that this whole esoteric stuff is worth something...unreal !!
Well anyways folks, if one believes in this kind of thing who am I to try to change your mind.
If you analyze the market structure you will get to the conclusion that it needs more losers than winners, otherwise it will cease to exist. All these people trading esoteric algorithms are feeding my account, so why should I argue.
Again I'm not a genius and I'm far from knowing more than anybody else, I'm just a technician that understand charts. Charts tells me all I need , I'm an expert on the EUR/USD pair but if someday for some reason I would have to trade the cow poop market in a obscure African city, no problems, just give me a chart and I will do it profitably.
"Again I'm not a genius and I'm far from knowing more than anybody else, I'm just a technician that understand charts."
You have certainly proven that point.
What a bunch of meaningless mumbo-jumbo with no actual value to what is going on. This market is nothing more than a massive cesspool of a casino with countless different "guessers" trying to out-guess the next guessser and exit their position with a profit. There is absolutely no basis in reality for any of the prices right now. A crash is going to happen and catch 90% of these clowns long and wipe them out in minutes!
If you trade for your own, small account, and only look at the world from that perspective, all of this stuff seems like mumbo jumbo that is irrelevant to fundamental values and the broader economy. But in order to understand what is really happening in markets you have to understand that most money is managed by large institutional investors. Prices are set by institutional, not retail investors. These people have 2 problems. The first is to figure out where fundamental values are going. The second is to actually position (execute) their portfolios accordingly. If you only manage your own money you don't have the second problem. You get to take whatever prices are set by the big players. But if you are managing billions of dollars you have to consider the execution problem, otherwise your bad executions will wipe out whatever profits you might have made on correct fundamental calls.
The article is about trade execution, it's not about fundamental investing; valuing companies. Both have to happen in the market. If you want to understand what' going on you have to understand both aspects of this game. They are both important.
Even the most traditional , old-school traders are using algorithms in order to find liquidity and get the best prices they can.
Why are you reposting snippets of the comments I previously made?
lol, he's front-running your comments.
hahaha. yeah he is. i'm not sure which i dislike more... the inane fanboy comments or having my own comments stolen. wait, nevermind. the inane fanboy comments are still worse :)
To attack anything other than chart reading as BS is, however, unreasonable.
nothing will change. We just
good articles; good articles 4 slow news day ..http://www..
hat tip: finance news & finance opinions