Riggers’ Propaganda
by Sinclair Noe
DOW + 17 = 16,530
SPX + 3 = 1884
NAS + 14 = 4138
10 YR YLD + .02 = 2.61%
OIL - .38 = 99.38
GOLD + 9.10 = 1310.70
SILV + .13 = 19.69
SPX + 3 = 1884
NAS + 14 = 4138
10 YR YLD + .02 = 2.61%
OIL - .38 = 99.38
GOLD + 9.10 = 1310.70
SILV + .13 = 19.69
Last week we told you about prosecutors and regulators
preparing to criminally prosecute Credit Suisse and maybe BNP Paribas, and the
slap on the wrist enforcement efforts of the past decade, and especially under
the mis-guidance of Attorney General Eric Holder’s “Too Big to Jail” policy. The
Swiss finance minister met Holder on Friday to discuss a US probe into Swiss
banks that allegedly helped Americans evade US taxes, which includes Credit
Suisse. Today, Holder posted a video on the Justice Department website saying
that the DOJ is pursuing criminal investigations of financial institutions that
could result in action in the coming weeks and months, and adding that no
company was “too big to jail.”
A criminal conviction of an entity regulated in the
United States could lead authorities to potentially revoke a charter,
essentially a death sentence for a bank. In his video, Holder said prosecutors
are working closely with regulators to address the issues before taking action,
"Rather than wall off banks from prosecution, the potential for such
severe consequences simply means that federal prosecutors conducting these
investigations must go the extra mile to coordinate closely with the regulators
that oversee these institutions' day-to-day operations."
It’s starting to sound like Holder is going after
criminal charges without the consequences of criminal charges; maybe he can
collect a slightly bigger fine, but still leave the bank charter in place.
Otherwise, this is a big pile of baloney. And the proof will be in the putting.
Until we see a banker jailed and a charter revoked, AG Holder is just spouting
propaganda.
The propaganda mill is spinning fast in Washington DC
these days. Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Mary Jo White flatly
rejected claims that retail investors are being fleeced by high-frequency
traders who can use their speed to jump ahead with buy and sell orders that
fetch better prices.
White told a US House of Representatives panel last week,
"The markets are not rigged." White reiterated that her agency's
investigators are actively pursuing probes into high-speed traders and dark pools,
or anonymous trading venues, but she also sought to dispel the notion that
using high-speed technologies to trade ahead of others using stock quotes
disseminated on public data feeds could meet the legal definition of
"unlawful insider trading." She acknowledged at one point that the
market is not "perfect" and told lawmakers that the agency's
"data-driven" review of market structure issues surrounding areas
such as order types, dark pool trading and data feeds was still ongoing. Even
though the SEC has not concluded or barely even launched the investigation,
White already knows the facts, saying: "I want to be very clear that the
market metrics suggest that the retail investor is very well-served by the
current market structure."
The rather unusual reason why SEC Chair White and
Congress are suddenly concerned about rigged markets is because of Michael
Lewis' latest book Flash Boys and HFT (high-frequency trading) and whether the
markets are manipulated. What they're not talking about is how the markets have
been set up for institutionalized rigging. And they are rigged; have been for a
long time.
It goes back to the time when the NYSE was the only game
in town, and prices were quoted in fractions: a half, a quarter, an eighth. Buyers
and sellers of listed shares used brokers to send orders to the NYSE Floor for
execution. On the Floor, "specialists" are in charge of every stock.
Their job was, and still is, to match up buyers and sellers and "keep a
fair and orderly market" as they facilitate "price discovery."
The specialist used to see all orders for the stocks they
were in charge of because all orders had to come to them. Besides matching up
buyers and sellers, specialists can also trade for their own account. That
means they can try and make money trading the stocks where they are
specialists. Here's how the specialist makes real money, besides getting paid a
small fee for matching up orders.
The key to being the specialist is seeing all the order
flow. Because specialists have knowledge of who is buying, who wants to buy and
how much and at what prices, and the same is true for knowing the sell side,
the specialist essentially gets to trade on inside information. The specialist
could raise the bid if he wanted to buy stock because he knew there were more
buy orders coming into his book, and if he was right and the stock moved
higher, he could sell his position for a nice profit.
And that is pretty much how the system works today. Eventually,
investors grew weary of having the specialists slice off profits on insider
information. Even though we got rid of the fractional system, we still have the
insiders slicing off small profits on each trade. Now the Nasdaq doesn’t have a
specialist system because there is no central trading floor where dealers meet
and call out prices, but in the automated, cyberspace world, each dealer is his
own specialist.
Eventually, electronic communications networks (ECNs)
sprang up. ECNs were and still are networks where dealers who weren't part of
Nasdaq could place their quotes and buy and sell with each other. From there it
wasn't long before Nasdaq dealers wanted to get onto all the ECNs and demands
were made to trade NYSE and AMEX stocks on the computer networks. That's how
technology changed the old specialist system into a mass of different trading
venues that now includes entirely new exchanges like BATS, and dark pools where
banks and crossing services trade for clients demanding anonymity.
The problem now is that there is no longer any one
central place where all orders go to be executed. Orders are spread around
based on cost, and services, and, most importantly, "payment for order
flow." So, now the online brokerage firms like Schwabb, and Etrade, and
whoever, don’t have their own traders to execute trades and they don’t have
their own trading desks, so they have to route those orders to an exchange or a
couple of exchanges to match up buyers and sellers. In order for exchanges and
networks that offer execution of orders to be successful, they have to have
orders coming in so they can match up buyers and sellers. Otherwise, if there
aren't enough orders to allow matching of buyers and sellers at prices where
customers want to transact, that exchange would have no "liquidity"
and it would lose business.
So how do all these competing exchanges get orders? They
pay for them. They pay Schwab, and Ameritrade and Scottrade for their
"order flow." That's right; your order at your discount brokerage is
sold to someone so it can be traded on their exchange. Who gets paid for your
order? Not you. Your brokerage gets paid.
So, after the switch to decimalization in 2001, we had
the rise of the market makers. Market makers are the same as specialists,
except they are mini-specialists in the stocks they trade electronically for
their broker-dealer or bank trading desk who trade on Nasdaq or on the ECNs or
anywhere where an intermediary can interpose himself into a trade, and they
will impose their trade ahead of your trade. That’s why they buy order flow, so
they can create an internal “book” so they can have their own inside
information on the order flow, so they can trade against it, or sell it to
other traders.
HFT operators are looking at all the order flow going
into all the different exchanges and trading venues they can peer into. They
look into the total flow of orders, which no single exchange can see, and with
their empirically modeled time sequencing of orders, spreads, and depth that
they run through reinforcement learning algorithms, they come up with a trade
that steps in to buy or sell shares before someone who intended to transact
there gets a chance to.
Speed is critical to high-frequency trading. Exchanges
rent HFT shops space next to their servers (co-location) so they get their data
faster than everyone else. That's legal. They couldn't do it if there weren't
so many exchanges and trading venues competing for orders. You can thank the
SEC for making that a reality without sensible limits. They couldn't do it if
there was no such thing as payment for order flow; yes, they get paid for their
order flow too. You can thank the SEC for allowing that neat little scheme. HFT shops can buy and sell at the same price
(that's a zero profit or loss), but because they provided some venue
"liquidity" by sending their super-fast order there to be executed,
they get paid. That's not arbitrage in the traditional sense; that's just
playing the game. They couldn't do it if they didn't have all the information
at the speed they get it at from the exchanges the SEC regulates.
And so you pay whenever you make a trade; you lose about
a penny per share, sometimes more, and you’re expected to accept this little
slice in the name of liquidity, but it isn’t really liquidity, it’s really just
volume. High-frequency trading has nothing to do with what liquidity is, what
liquidity means to the market. Volume is not liquidity.
Everything is usually fine when markets are moving up or
are relatively stable. We won't really notice HFT. But, in a wicked downdraft,
when HFT players turn off their computers, we will see that there are no bids
on any specialists' books or parked with market makers. There will be no
stopping stocks from falling for that reason. We saw it in the May 2010 flash
crash. That's what HFT has done to the market. It has made it a dark pool, and
a dark pool is not required to yell out a price like the old-school
specialists; instead prices come in at a more leisurely pace, when it suits the
ECNs, after they scalped their share. What this means is that we don’t really
know what the price is, and you can’t have a market without prices, which means
one day we could have a catastrophic market failure; despite the propaganda
otherwise.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.