YM is an embarrassing index futures instrument

BPtrader · Dec 14, 2009

It often has a spread of 2 points, no liquidity to support its 1-point increment.

I think YM should declare a 3-point increment, to avoid this embarrassment of 2-point spread.

Rod Shaft · Dec 14, 2009

why don't you just condense your market depth to 3 levels? then it'll be more aesthetically suited to your tastes

nazzdack · Dec 14, 2009

Quote from BPtrader:
......to avoid this embarrassment of 2-point spread.

Feel free to "sweep the screen" up and down in order to create the bid-ask spread that you want.

Pekelo · Dec 14, 2009

Quote from BPtrader:

It often has a spread of 2 points,

...which is still less than 1 tick ES.

1 tick YM spread is a possibility, not an obligation.

maxpi · Dec 14, 2009

It was thin today and it will be tomorrow up until the FOMC.. whatever... take the time off... I like days off better than really profitable ones anyhow...

increasenow · Dec 17, 2009

aint thin now...really only thin if you are throwing 10 or more cars at it

BPtrader · Dec 17, 2009

Quote from maxpi:

It was thin today and it will be tomorrow up until the FOMC.. whatever... take the time off... I like days off better than really profitable ones anyhow...

shouldn't be thin at all time, because the index has 30 stocks to back it up. Those who manage YM index are either incompetent or lazy.

A well-managed index should never lack liquidity due to the contribution of component stocks.

YM managers should take a lesson on the conversion between the index and its component stocks.

NKNY · Dec 18, 2009

Quote from BPtrader:

shouldn't be thin at all time, because the index has 30 stocks to back it up. Those who manage YM index are either incompetent or lazy.

A well-managed index should never lack liquidity due to the contribution of component stocks.

YM managers should take a lesson on the conversion between the index and its component stocks.

???