Visualizing The Death Of The Citi HFT Rebate Collection Machine

Tyler Durden's picture

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Mongo's picture

*blip* *blop*

 

binary disco dancers in neon lights...

Thomas's picture

Just like any other split: They wait for the stock to return to the pre-split price and then repeat.

Urban Redneck's picture

To be timed to coincide with the launch of QE3

Weisbrot's picture

the TBTF bank is now TETT, Too Expensive Too Trade :-)

 

He_Who Carried The Sun's picture

Its the matrix! We're in it.

sabra1's picture

but,but, they raised their dividend by 1 cent!

chrisd's picture

"volume is not liquidity, and HFT provides volume not liquidity"

 

This needs to be the rallying cry for the destruction of HFT. Keep repeating it until the point is made clear.


Mercury's picture

I suppose you could say liquidity = expected volume but it's ridiculous how the two terms have been thrown around  synonymously for so long.

rocker's picture

There is a easy solution for this. Tax each trade made. We would all be better off. Then the real liquidity trades would reveal themselves and the phony bots will have to pony up for their fraudulent trades. It's better than having the bots hedge your good trades for days pushing stocks up or down to benefit themselves. 

Rynak's picture

Genius! It's like hashcash for marketbots.

oogs66's picture

you had me at 10-1 reverse split...you lost me on the charts

SilverRhino's picture

Well it was a 10 to 1 reverse split.   Of course now it looks like those 10 shares are only worth 9 shares in the last few days of trades. 

It will be interesting to see if C ever drops into single digit territory again.

SheepDog-One's picture

Supercool lookin charts, that shit is disco.

treemagnet's picture

Like seeing things through the eyes of a terminator.

The Axe's picture

Hearing AIG deal is off the table....its a no go...

centerline's picture

Sad day when it is time to trade in a terminal for an o-scope.

covsire's picture

Don't under-estimate Citi.  They have a lot of infrastructure and brand power left.  Also, they've been selling off their bags of crap as fast as they can.  Of course, this means little if the Obama recovery isn't happening like we're being told it is.  Rumor has it, Citi has found several hundred 100oz bars of Gold in an old forgotten vault and has traded it for some of that magical Obama-fairy dust.  They're planning to sprinkle it all over 399 Park Ave this weekend.  By monday, our obamaconemy will rise and Citi will be catapulted to the high 80's with a 25 cent dividend by years end!

the grateful unemployed's picture

you're right, their banking business is solid, they got rid of the retail brokerage at the right time, their leadership is relatively blameless in any of the 2008 shennaigans, (they are or were up to their ass in bad mortgage paper, but hey there are no consequences are there?) the government got behind them early, and the worset seems to be over. which  makes me cringe at this latest move. but if it shrinks the float, that is going to help i guess, i figured they would just buy it all back using Bens magic money, and then retire it, so maybe its a good thing

disclosure, went long near the bottom, and inclined to hold.

LawsofPhysics's picture

This is the same citi that has been bailed out by the taxpayer some 12 times in the last 30 years right?

the grateful unemployed's picture

they are actually a retail bank (although Goldman now has FDIC, is has no retail accounts) and they have international branches. They were in deep in the mortgage fiasco, but probably not as deep as BoA and Wells. A bank is a necessary business, they were bailed out by taxpayers, while Goldman simply stole all of AIGs assets, and then feigned innocence, while their top men run the Treasury department. there's really no comparison between them. their stock was punished, (and their shareholders). and i am sure as a money center bank they do a number of dubious things, their business model demands they participate in most of it. do i like their leadership, and their responsibility to consumers, yeah i do. i do business at a CITI branch and they treat me pretty well. I hear other people bitch all the time about Wells and BoA. and the vampire squid front runs my pension fund, and does zip shit for me otherwise. its a rough world ducklings, but making a few basic distinctions between who is who will help you a lot.

Clowns on Acid's picture

Yo grateful...they were deeper than BOA et al, they were broke..they were bankrupt. Yeh they have sold off a bunch of shiite, but notably no other bank creatyed an entity called "bad bank" to place all there shiite. 

TruthInSunshine's picture

Propaganda!

I see Green Shoots, an organic recovery, a strengthening economy with solid fundamentals, and if the government (which is now, in reality, the marginal additional consumer of the economy) pulls its extraordinary level of hot beef injections, all will be unicorns, pixie dust and rainbows again.

All is well!

 

 

 

/sarc

jstalin's picture

I have no idea what I'm looking at.

g speed's picture

IMHO     --10 for 1 means ten shares traded for one share-- priced times ten at the moment of reverse split-- HFT (high frequency trading) will use computing power to place many trades a second and withdraw or sell instantly when price moves a % of one cent. The trading programs are compeating against other HFT programs so you see many different types of code. However the HFT trade in currency so the number of shares bid is dependant on the price. In this case Citi has volume at one tenth the presplit volume but the liquidity persists--- the crux- volume does not equal liquidity--

augie's picture

+1

Wow. My four-year-old imaginary daughter could understand that explanation.

Miles Kendig's picture

Keep at it !!  It isn't all that hard to learn and once you do the fun is stupendous.

unununium's picture

Aw, just because they had to split 1 for 10 to afford a $0.01 dividend?  Harsh!

Reptil's picture

Skynet threw up a little in it's own mouth.

Overpowered By Funk's picture

Markets are dead. End of story.

adonisdemilo's picture

NYSE:C 1,000,000 shares @ $4.60 = 100,000 shares @$46.00 date 29 th April 2011

100,000 shares @$46.00 = ZERO, date to be announced, hopefully soon. 

uhb's picture

well, I see light at the end of the tunnel... it's probably a train :)

Helvidius's picture

I don't know what all that shit means.

Rynak's picture

the rebate collecting robots who would ping pong the stock among each other with no intention of ever holding, merely creating the impression of a deep and liquid market

 

Even more simple explanation: A bunch of computers selling and buying forth and back to each other, to give the impression that there is strong market activity. Bot A sells to bot B, Bot B sells to Bot A, Bot A sells to bot B.... and so on.

EDIT: Considering how systematic those algos are, i wonder if one could detect such bots, by simply rendering such charts to soundwaves, and then listening to them.

Helvidius's picture

Now see, that's what I'm talking about.  You're now my go-to guy for the ever needed "dumb this down for me" request.

Alex Kintner's picture

It's so true. US technology is amazing. All that trading activity done at peta-flop speed.

USA, USA.  #WHINING!

Rynak's picture

Actually, it is china and taiwan who is selling the hardware to the USA (though, the software may be inhouse. And from looking at the graphs, it seems to work VERY primitive (but who needs "advanced" when the market is so stupid.... similiar to who needs good propaganda, when the masses are beyond stupid).

Gimp's picture

I am all over that 1 Cent Dividend.....yeah baby, ROI is back

digalert's picture

Wasn't Citi a Cramer buybuybuy fave?

Piranhanoia's picture

The atheist priest must still pretend twice to keep its fictitious job.

FreakuentFlyer's picture

I'm a bit confused by these graphs. i suppose it would help me to compare these with some before/after graphs of 10-to-1 stock splits from the time when there was such a thing as true liquidity. i mean, that would be the scientific method?