Anyone else concerned by DirectEdge tagging orders as RETAIL?

Retails is the category that is overall massively losing to everybody else. How can making their orders easier to identify to a broader group of participants be positive for retails?

It is also the category that is least technically versed and the only one whose interests are unrepresented. With that premise which way do you think a technical regulatory decision would affect them?

It's evidently a way to lift industry's returns at a time of diminishing volatility, revenues and retail volumes, by squeezing the losers even more.

This is beyond belief and beyond decency.
In other words, business as usual in the financial industry.

ras72
 
I don't think this helps retail at all. I think retail orders are more susceptible to being "gamed" and incur higher adverse selection risk. I also think there are profitable strategies that actively trade against retail, as opposed to passive market-making. Anyway, I think this is a bad idea and disappointed that the SEC approved this seemingly with no resistance at all.

At the very least, it introduces even more information asymmetry since retail investors certainly won't have access to the DirectEdge book feed for this kind of info.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top