I wish there were more debates between HFT/exchange folks with Hunsader out there because I think it would be illuminating. Both sides seem to stand on their soapboxes and shout, but never truly debate the details.
That's a weird article. Nanex of all people is complaining that people are jumping ahead of HFT with negligible price improvements, making the hfts investment in low latency useless.
I mean they pretend its about retail, but the people who lose from subpenny trades are hfts. That's who investor b is, most likely - the fastest HFT.
Personally I believe we should re-decimalize - allow quotes at 0.01 cents. This will induce HFT to focus less on latency and more on price improvement.
Comments
No, he's referring to the lower bid/ask spread that HFTs cause.
http://qed.econ.queensu.ca/pub/faculty/milne/322/IIROC_FeeCh...
Related, how do you feel about sub-penny slicing as mentioned here: http://www.nanex.net/aqck2/3519.html
I wish there were more debates between HFT/exchange folks with Hunsader out there because I think it would be illuminating. Both sides seem to stand on their soapboxes and shout, but never truly debate the details.
That's a weird article. Nanex of all people is complaining that people are jumping ahead of HFT with negligible price improvements, making the hfts investment in low latency useless.
I mean they pretend its about retail, but the people who lose from subpenny trades are hfts. That's who investor b is, most likely - the fastest HFT.
Personally I believe we should re-decimalize - allow quotes at 0.01 cents. This will induce HFT to focus less on latency and more on price improvement.