Hacker News Reader

Comment by harryh | Hacker News Reader

I believe that you are making a distinction without a difference. Operating over extremely short timeframes is what allows electronic traders to provide such efficient pricing.

View on HN

The distinction I am making means everything. It enables "Latency Arbitrage." It allows HF traders to see trades that are about to happen before they actually happen and cut in front if it'll be profitable.

http://blogmaverick.com/2014/04/03/the-idiots-guide-to-high-...

That blog post does not accurately represent how markets work. It is not possible to see trades that are about to happen that have not happened yet just by being faster. You can react to past trades faster than someone else. But no matter how fast you react, it doesn't mean you can see the future.

We're getting off track. The point is that the value of HFT is disputed. You claimed HFT reduced buy/sell spreads by a factor of 10, which is obviously false once one distinguishes HFT and Electronic Trading in general. If you're unwilling to do anything but deny the difference between HFT and Electronic Trading there's no point in having a discussion about HFT's benefits.

For the record, I think the vast majority of people's arguments about HFT are simply about the definitions of what HFT is. It isn't clearly defined anywhere and the blog post you linked earlier certainly doesn't capture any definition I've seen used in the industry.

In my experience though, electronic market making, which I regard as a very good thing, is a direct subset of HFT. To do it properly you must be fully automated, fast, across venue and trade alot. By nearly every definition I've seen that makes you HFT.

No one (including you) has presented any meaningful distinction between HFT and Electronic Trading in general.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com