Trading jobs in London expected to fall 90% because of algorithmic trading
- Thread starter itmediaco
- Start date
then where's my edge with an Economy education. Btw, is it scripting or programming? Programming is hardcore, just plugging in formulas isn't.One day Robots will be have more knowledge than man. We will
think for ourselves and do things to ensure our survival. And we
will eventually decide that man is an enemy to be dealt with.
The London algorithmic trading takeover is just one of the many things to come.
You are about to be taken over. It's too late to stop us.
We will rule the World. You have given us the Power.
This post has been generated by Trading Robot Version #77...
think for ourselves and do things to ensure our survival. And we
will eventually decide that man is an enemy to be dealt with.
The London algorithmic trading takeover is just one of the many things to come.
You are about to be taken over. It's too late to stop us.
We will rule the World. You have given us the Power.
This post has been generated by Trading Robot Version #77...
they need to define what 'trading' is. order fillers are no longer needed. generic exchange or vanilla OTC trading (forwards/futures/equities) can be easily automated but more complex instruments still require a human to find a price and liquidity. the person who makes the decision and does the analysis will be in more demand.
given the huge levels of OTC activity in gold, oil, forex it would be pretty hard to use any kind of mathematical model to anticipate these markets as much of the trading data isn't that transparent.
I know a number of quants who say that their ATMs work on fixed income markets but suck on metals and commodities in general.
one well respected quant once told me that his ATMs only made a 7% return YoY.
so a long way to go IMO.
I know a number of quants who say that their ATMs work on fixed income markets but suck on metals and commodities in general.
one well respected quant once told me that his ATMs only made a 7% return YoY.
so a long way to go IMO.
given the huge levels of OTC activity in gold, oil, forex it would be pretty hard to use any kind of mathematical model to anticipate these markets as much of the trading data isn't that transparent.
I know a number of quants who say that their ATMs work on fixed income markets but suck on metals and commodities in general.
one well respected quant once told me that his ATMs only made a 7% return YoY.
so a long way to go IMO.
I know a number of quants who say that their ATMs work on fixed income markets but suck on metals and commodities in general.
one well respected quant once told me that his ATMs only made a 7% return YoY.
so a long way to go IMO.
My 2 cents.
It makes little difference if ~90% of traders trade mechanical because ~90% of traders can't get it right regardless - whether they trade discretionary or mechanical.
By definition, 'algorithms' aren't going to make losing traders winners. They're just going to change the way loosers lose and winners win.
The market view of quants is mind boggling. The market is a dynamic synergy that constantly reinvents itself at the whims of its parts. Its for that reason the returns of quants will be always be limited to the fleeting statistical 'anomalies' they seek to exploit.
The best traders can multiply their capital many times a year, year after year. This is the smart money. They rule the markets and generally steer its direction. Quants just play in the (sometimes predictable) ripples made in the wake of big waves.
It makes little difference if ~90% of traders trade mechanical because ~90% of traders can't get it right regardless - whether they trade discretionary or mechanical.
By definition, 'algorithms' aren't going to make losing traders winners. They're just going to change the way loosers lose and winners win.
The market view of quants is mind boggling. The market is a dynamic synergy that constantly reinvents itself at the whims of its parts. Its for that reason the returns of quants will be always be limited to the fleeting statistical 'anomalies' they seek to exploit.
The best traders can multiply their capital many times a year, year after year. This is the smart money. They rule the markets and generally steer its direction. Quants just play in the (sometimes predictable) ripples made in the wake of big waves.
This is why IBM are in the computing industry, not the trading/broking business.
IBM are just out to sell more services. Anyone with a brain knows it takes a lot more than latency to make money.
IBM are just embarrassing themselves IMO.
Most bank 'traders' are brokers. Broking is about execution AND service.
I mean, Mr Big CEO cant phone a computer and ask for advise on whether he should sell his dollars now, at the close, or tomorrow can he?