Lime Brokerage fined $625k by FINRA

traider said:
This is crazy, 625k can be earned in a few minutes by a good hft algo.
More...

So they can still fine the clients that made that much. If they fined brokers for all the illicit profits made by their clients then all brokers would be out of business.
 
Lime Brokerage originated as an offshoot of the Lime proprietary trading firm.

It would appear that trading exchanges other than the CME are starting to clamp down on abusive Algos.
 
guru said:
So they can still fine the clients that made that much. If they fined brokers for all the illicit profits made by their clients then all brokers would be out of business.
More...
Where do you see that the client got fined?
 
zdreg said:
Where do you see that the client got fined?
More...

I wrote “they can” as a response, pointing out that even when a client makes $600k in a few minutes (though this already sounds unlikely) then the broker may make less and that’s why the broker fine may not be in $millions.
 
Get out of here?!

I actually met Mark back in the day. Fascinatingly intelligent guy. INSANE bike enthusiast.

Oh, and like I had mentioned elsewhere, this "Spoofing" nonsense is just that ... nonsense. As I said there?

How do you prove "spoofing"? Ok ... let's just set aside the fact that Traders have been doing this since ... oh I don't know ... about the year 3,000 B.C.E., and I consider it the predatory nature of all market participants (as well they should ... how many of these auction shows that are popular on T.V. show participants doing something akin to this? How many times has Rick Harrison tried NOT to show interest, when he is interested in an item, and vice versa? I mean Good god ... )

How do we decide what is "feigned interest".

Well, according to this, it is posting relatively large number of limit orders on one side of the order book to make other participants believe there is pressure to sell.

Uhm ... I have a question ...

Just a small silly one ...

Again ... aside from the fact that Traders legitimately do this so as to NOT affect price in many cases, when they want it for X price ...

How do we determine intent?

Ever cancel a Limit Order you put in; and then re-enter the order elsewhere on the book?

Oops! You spoofed!

Ever have to trade in size, and knowing there is a Hybrid FIFO-pro-rata mechanism in place, to fill orders, and you need 3,000 ... so you put in the order for 5,000, knowing that you'll be filled for less, and wala, you get 2,725 filled, and you cancel the rest of the order?

Oops! Did you spoof?

It's a nonsensical rule, that is open to interpretation, and dare I say? Is used to scapegoat traders when politicians want to feel like they are "being aggressive" against "those nasty traders"
 
So to achieve fair, equitable, markets we should set the benchmark as low as auctions on used car sales lots? And what is defined as spoofing? It's very clear, look it up. It's the frequent and repetitive nature of the action that defines the crime. Are you an idiot?

Nothing here is open to interpretation. Every child recognizes it is deceptive, deceitful behavior. It misleads and is designed to disadvantage others though dishonest means. Your justification of that behavior is that cheating is prevalent in other areas of life? Your type is the real filth and enemy of human kind. I am just glad that cheats like you generally can't fly under the radar for too long. I pride myself in being 100% ethical and moral in ALL my professional life, not one single copied homework in school, no cheating on exams, no trickery in entrance exams, no white lies ever at work, not even once. Guess what, I got as far as I wanted and had drive. Where do you stand? And how proud are you of your past achievements given you most likely cheated throughout your entire life?

raVar said:
Get out of here?!

I actually met Mark back in the day. Fascinatingly intelligent guy. INSANE bike enthusiast.

Oh, and like I had mentioned elsewhere, this "Spoofing" nonsense is just that ... nonsense. As I said there?

How do you prove "spoofing"? Ok ... let's just set aside the fact that Traders have been doing this since ... oh I don't know ... about the year 3,000 B.C.E., and I consider it the predatory nature of all market participants (as well they should ... how many of these auction shows that are popular on T.V. show participants doing something akin to this? How many times has Rick Harrison tried NOT to show interest, when he is interested in an item, and vice versa? I mean Good god ... )

How do we decide what is "feigned interest".

Well, according to this, it is posting relatively large number of limit orders on one side of the order book to make other participants believe there is pressure to sell.

Uhm ... I have a question ...

Just a small silly one ...

Again ... aside from the fact that Traders legitimately do this so as to NOT affect price in many cases, when they want it for X price ...

How do we determine intent?

Ever cancel a Limit Order you put in; and then re-enter the order elsewhere on the book?

Oops! You spoofed!

Ever have to trade in size, and knowing there is a Hybrid FIFO-pro-rata mechanism in place, to fill orders, and you need 3,000 ... so you put in the order for 5,000, knowing that you'll be filled for less, and wala, you get 2,725 filled, and you cancel the rest of the order?

Oops! Did you spoof?

It's a nonsensical rule, that is open to interpretation, and dare I say? Is used to scapegoat traders when politicians want to feel like they are "being aggressive" against "those nasty traders"
More...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top