And its the market makers who provide the liquidity (with limit orders) for the long-term traders when they do decide to trade, not the short-term traders (who take liquidity with market orders).
And its the market makers who provide the liquidity (with limit orders) for the long-term traders when they do decide to trade, not the short-term traders (who take liquidity with market orders).
If someone trades with a HFT market maker its because
a) they are un-informed about the current true price
b) they choose to optimize execution time over best price
Its the same market game that`s been played for decades, just with different players and tools.
By definition, HFT jump into liquid market and count on exiting illiquid markets faster than anyone else. That means that they don't actually bring a greater assurance that a trade will happen, in contrast to the traditional "market makers" of NYSE. The "flash crash" can be seen as a simple illustration of this but so could be the greater volatility we have seen in the last few years.
Which "flash crash"? The one about a year ago or the one in the mid-60s?
Whether these are exacerbated by hft is hard to tell, but I can't see how it would help damp volatility. Probably they have more to do with momentum investors and algorithmic trading, though they can easily happen with only human trade too, just at a slower pace. Would be interesting to see stats on volatility going back decades, but it's probably quite a complex subject for a layperson.
Here are some examples: http://www.usatoday.com/money/markets/2011-05-16-mini-flash-...