Quote from WinstonTJ:
I couldnât disagree more â would you say that there is a difference between (any type) trading with vs. without order flow? My objection is that you seem to be placing the blame generally on HFT while not distinguishing between traders with/without order flow AND by not recognizing that computers and automated trading have taken things in a direction that has made manual traders obsolete, therefore most anything that canât be traded by hand is broadly classified as HFT.
I agree with you. This is why I often state that HFT has become a catch all phrase and that we need to distinguish the specific problems with our market structure from everything else that is considered HFT. I was simply rewording your statement, which included the word HFT. I could have left that part out and named names: Citidel, GS, Timber Hill, Knight, Getco, etc. The average algorithmic shop, proprietary trading company, hi volume or hi speed market makers and the like add value to the trading public. Better?
Quote from WinstonTJ:
Internal Market Making (with order flow) is a completely different type of trading than individuals/funds trading in the high frequency space without order flow. I think if we can agree on that distinction then yes, I agree with everything you posted. Can you prove that internal MMs are prioritizing orders based on fees/rebates over the order in which they were received? If thatâs the case it sounds like a perfect opportunity for a class action lawsuit.
IMO, generally hating on anyone in the automated space and classifying us all in the same group is grossly misleading.
[/B]
I will go ahead and agree with you completely on this. There is a real threat of congress implementing some idiotic regulation that sounds nice to the ignorant masses, such as data speed bumps, tforced limit order freezes, and the like. It would be prudent for all of us, me included, to direct our criticisms at the exact issues in the marketplace instead of using the generic term HFT.
