Wed, Jan 28, 2015
A A A
Welcome Guest
Free Trial RSS
Get FREE trial access to our award winning publications
Industry Updates

Lack of data on high frequency trading means regulators should move slowly - Greenwich Associates Research

Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Opalesque Industry Updates - A new Greenwich Market Pulse reveals that institutional investors around the world would support new regulations on high-frequency trading. However, much of this support appears centered on specific practices such as the use of flash orders and indications of interest that are widely seen as elements of front-running and may inaccurately be lumped into the debate on the merits of high-frequency trading.

The survey results show that, when it comes to the broad issue of whether high-frequency trading strategies are placing traditional long-only institutional and retail investors at a disadvantage, institutions are deeply divided. The reason: There is little empirical data to demonstrate whether high-frequency trading benefits the market as a whole by providing liquidity or unfairly increases trading costs for investors. Even some of the most active institutional stock traders cannot agree about whether high-frequency trading helps or hurts institutions, retail investors and the companies with publicly trading stock. Until these questions are answered, regulators should limit any new rules to narrow trading practices that have an obvious and proven negative impact on investors.

“More specifically, we would urge the SEC to commission an academic study on the short-term and mid-term effects of high-frequency trading on a company’s stock: opinion is evenly divided as to prospective benefits vs. negatives, with fully half of institutional investors claiming uncertainty,” says Greenwich Associates consultant Jay Bennett.

High Frequency Trading: Friend or Foe?
In its latest Greenwich Market Pulse, Greenwich Associates surveyed 78 institutional investors in Canada, the U.S. and Europe. The institutions participating in this survey interact with high-frequency traders on a near constant basis, and these institutions would be affected more than anyone else by any negative or positive influence from high-frequency trading strategies. The U.S. institutions included in this group generated an average $50 million in brokerage commission payments this year. Fifty-seven percent of these institutions would support additional regulations on high-frequency trading, while 21% would actually support a high-frequency trading ban, though the latter sentiment primarily comes from Canadian advocates.

However, these institutions are sharply divided between those that see high-frequency trading practices as malevolent or benign, as adding liquidity to global markets or preying on traditional stock investors. Forty-five percent of participating institutions think high-frequency trading poses a threat to the current market structure, while 36% believe it actually benefits the market and investors by increasing overall liquidity. However, almost 20% of institutions say they do not know enough about high-frequency trading to make a judgment about its overall impact on the market, much less on specific stock prices. “Institutions are even split about whether high-frequency trading helps or hurts their own trading operations and outcomes,” says Jay Bennett.

Institutions do agree on one thing: They do not have enough information to make any final judgments about high-frequency trading. As a survey participant from a U.S. asset management company puts it, “Both detractors and those touting the liquidity provision and spread-tightening benefits of high-frequency trading have very little data to back them up.” The market seems to agree: Eighty-seven percent of the institutional investors participating in the survey say that at the present moment, there is no hard data to definitively determine whether high-frequency trading increases or decreases trading costs.

“Despite the lack of clarity surrounding high-frequency trading as defined as strategies that seek to take advantage of small market inefficiencies, the Greenwich Market Pulse results suggest to us that institutional investors believe regulatory actions aimed at limiting the use of individual techniques like flash orders and IOIs to maintain a level playing field might be entirely appropriate at this time, as these are seen as unfair advantages,” says Greenwich Associates consultant John Colon. “However, the results also make it clear that additional research on high-frequency trading’s impact on investors and its net effect on the market structure is needed before regulators act to impose any broad new rules.”

kb

What do you think?

   Use "anonymous" as my name    |   Alert me via email on new comments   |   
Today's Exclusives Today's Other Voices More Exclusives
Previous Opalesque Exclusives                                  
More Other Voices
Previous Other Voices                                               
Access Alternative Market Briefing


  • Top Forwarded
  • Top Tracked
  • Top Searched
  1. Investing - U.S. investors favor currency hedged Europe ETFs as euro tumbles, Quants win back investors as Swiss franc fuels volatility gains, David Einhorn's $7bn hedge fund is loading up on this stock, Hedge fund BlueMountain Capital unveils Ocwen Financial short, claims default on notes[more]

    U.S. investors favor currency hedged Europe ETFs as euro tumbles From Reuters.com: U.S. investors stung by the falling euro who want to stay invested in Europe are turning to exchange-traded funds designed to strip out the impact of the region's currency. The biggest among so-called "cur

  2. News Briefs - Millennials use tech tools to jump into investing, Winklevoss twins to launch bitcoin exchange with FDIC insured deposits, Robertson’s legacy from hedge funds to New Zealand, Real estate managers exploring smaller open-end funds[more]

    Millennials use tech tools to jump into investing It is the Facebookification of monetary investing. From social networking platforms that enable young investors to stick to every other's stock-picking mojo, to internet sites for initially-timers hungry for a piece of the Silicon Valley

  3. Top performing private equity firms you should invest in[more]

    Komfie Manalo, Opalesque Asia: Professor Oliver Gottschalg of Paris-based HEC Business School, also known as Ecole des Hautes Etudes Commerciales de Paris has released his annual ranking of the top performing private equity firms. The 2014 HEC-DowJones Private Equity Performance Ranking

  4. Comment - Why invest in hedge funds if they don't outperform the market?[more]

    From Forbes.com: Hedge funds have always been a bit exotic and an enigma to some, but bottom line they are supposed to produce good returns using a range of strategies including global macro, event driven and relative value (arbitrage). And, sophisticated or high-net-worth individuals (HNWIs) could

  5. Owen Li 'truly sorry' for blowing up $100m of hedge fund’s assets[more]

    From CNBC.com: A hedge fund manager told clients he is "truly sorry" for losing virtually all their money. Owen Li, the founder of Canarsie Capital in New York, said Tuesday he had lost all but $200,000 of the firm's capital—down from the roughly $100 million it ran as of late March. "I take r