I'm surprised people still trust Robinhood after the GameStop debacle.
Gamestop meme traders deliberately set out to smash the system and they succeeded to a small extent. Robin Hood, in the face of the partners they rely on refusing to allow further acquisitions, did the best they could by still allowing selling.
For any normal trader what happened on one specific day to one specific stock which was deliberately manipulated on a massive scale to try and cause a trading halt is utterly irrelevant.
Because there are better brokerages out there.
> in the face of the partners they rely
You mean their actual customers. There are brokerages where the incentives are not perversed like this.
> did the best they could by still allowing selling
Assuming they acted in good faith to do their "best", their CEO was still incompetent failing to anticipate to liquidity issues
> what happened on one specific day to one specific stock
They halted buying on more than GME.
I said there are better brokerages, and that point still stands. Vanguard, for example, didn't.
I never said that all other brokerages are better than Robinhood. In fact, there are worst.
Just because other brokerages did the "exact same thing" doesn't excuse them or Robinhood.
I am also a user and I love it - and while I don't trade crypto, but they offer the lowest commission in crypto. And my uninvested cash gets a decent interest (5%), and my trades execute reasonably well. It maybe not for a professional trader, but my own experience has been fantastic for what it offers.
Also incredibly thankful that there is no trading fees across many of the brokers now, which I believe was forced by Robinhood. I know of the PFOF controversy, and regardless I hold this view.
I also know I can't change your view, but hope you have a great weekend ahead!
I don’t know what your qualifications for a proper brokerage could be.
You mean Robin Hood manipulated the markets? By only allowing sell orders you manipulated the price and market. In some cases they even automatically sold positions without knowledge of the retail traders.
They should have gone bankrupt, instead they robbed many retail traders.
What actually happened is brokerages are required to hold capital reserves to cover options held by customers. You can spend a few dollars and your brokerage is required to have sometimes tens or hundreds of thousands in the bank to cover your option.
During peak memestock options activity went to a crazy unprecedented level, Robinhood had to raise billions of dollars in a day or two, like nearly four billion in a few days. And it wasn’t enough so they had to stop trading or put limits on buying options for GameStop and a few others. Etrade and interactive brokers at least also did.
They didn’t go bankrupt or get stomped by regulators or congress because they were behaving within the law and reasonably in an unprecedented situation.
My understanding comes from articles like this one https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2021/02/03/why-investors-were-willi...
If they, hypothetically, had gone bankrupt, how would that have helped retail traders in that moment?
That is a very strange and biased POV. They did the exact same thing as people have done for years and years, the only difference being this was joined by many people not in the industry.
I guess it was a hyperbolic to describe it as smashing the system, but the key thing is that the primary purpose was to cause disruption, rather than purely to make a profit. That they became angry when that disruption occurred is a bit baffling to me.
> Robinhood restricted trading in these stocks in order to meet collateral requirements at their clearinghouse
> The [class action] case was dismissed by the Miami federal court that November, on the grounds that the plantiffs fell short of providing direct evidence of an antitrust conspiracy