Search results

Sounds like things are working out. Just keep doing what you're doing I guess, from a friendly time zone.

Comming back to realiy for a sec, if I may .. what's your trading style, to be making a living running about 100K, while paying IB's rates?

Hi Murray, funny coincidence - you invented a system called Braincell , right?

Depends entirely on your cost of capital vs the market. Basically a rates trade, actually. edit: If a covered call cost more than a naked short put .. then there'd be a frenzy of short stock + long call + short put trades going on, boxing it in. Come on Don :p

Anyone? Comment above is from the point of view of setting up a casino game, running a sports betting book, or a market maker making a spread. Customers pay the vig.

Your average punter can usually get more exposure to the underlying through a naked short put than through long-stock-on-margin. Thus faster blow up with the short puts. Nothing to do with put-call parity .. just more conservative on the long stock margining. :p

I'll PM you.

:D

I'd say it's pretty unnatural to build a fix interface on top of a binary exchange connector, for example. If it talks native, you talk native. Throw away frameworks and pretty diagrams, and just hit it with your orders directly. Creating fix to consume fix is just silly.

Depends on the exchange & the API. Sometimes it's also easier to avoid FIX, and build the algo right into the exchange connector. (And with less of that silly architecture & platform overhead). details details ..

"puts you ahead of everyone not there" -- Agreed. But, a lot of people are there. .. I know an exchange that ran out of colo space a few years ago. After that, no matter what you did, you couldn't get in. Good times for the few firms that were there from the start.

I see that as being a problem more than a solution. Because it's that cheap for the space / box, there's not much competitive advantage in it. Still some cost if you pay guys to build the connectors, etc. (if the OP does). So, just saying, all there is is strategy, and that can't really...

If something is moving more than a few ticks .. you could quote at multiple levels.. while splitting your size.

I agree with the posts above. Guess I'm trying to say, that without a few "good" strategies, don't even bother to build the infrastructure. The grunt work to build HFT co-lo'd infrastructure today is reasonably straight forward, but still expensive, and *importantly* it does not give you any...

Come on sle, it's both simpler, and worse than that. Because the majority of traders by sheer numbers are retail, and every synthetic retail product has an edge on it, the average case is a small loss for the trader. So .. given enough time, 100% lose, just by the law of large numbers. Even...

Sure, there are grunt programmers out there to build a platform / connectors etc. Lots of those guys. But someone you can pay to build a strategy .. not so much.

Seems to me it's a question of which distributions are stable. If you can model the distribution, you can trade it. If not, then you're guessing.

Rationally correct response though. See flow coming, have no interest facilitating it, unless getting compensated one way or another. And maybe it's informed flow :eek: => Unless there's liquidity behind you, cancel.

Come on fella. Think it through, and post something intelligent. Would it be a good idea. Why / why not. Where the error is. I'm pretty sure you're smart enough :)

A legitimate algo trading consultant. Wow, almost fell on my chair laughing.