IB - Getting paid to provide liquidity for options

We have a Time and Sales tab that follows the largest trades in a name each day and you can check historically. This can be downloaded too. We track the price paid, our smoothed theoretical value, and the current profit of the trade.
e6a5295eb83081e0b3f821c949ba2d51.png

https://gyazo.com/e6a5295eb83081e0b3f821c949ba2d51

Well, you are entitled to your opinion. Unless option markets are penny wide, I see a large number of prints in-between the bid/ask spread and the cost savings can be material with or without rebates. I wonder is @ORATS has done any studies to show the percent of executions done between the bid/ask?
 
Thanks, but this is just anecdotal, like you said. It is easy to fool oneself; the mental accounting tends to forget or omit infrequent but small "outliers" e.g. from performance chasing when the market moves away. The fact that you made money as a MM with customer market orders does not imply that market orders are worse than limit orders for customers. In fact for equities with the U.S. market microstructure, I am quite sure based on evidence that small market orders have lower all-in trade cost than non-marketable limit orders in the long run average; and I think the U.S. equity options market is organized similar to the U.S. equities market. We're obviously only talking about time insensitive traders or investors who can afford "lazy" trading in the first place; if execution speed or volume are critical, market orders are a no brainer.

I disagree with this post.

I was an electronic market maker. We lived for market orders.

Assuming you will always trade, a limit order will be superior to a market order. The only reason to use a market order is because of the assumption “you will always trade.” The cost of ensuring an execution is losing control of price.
 
Back
Top