Dow+150.25up+1.52%
10,058.64
Nasdaq+24.82up+1.17%
2,150.87
S&P+13.78up+1.30%
1,070.52

MSN Money video

Video on MSN Money
This video player requires the installation of the free Adobe Flash Player
More video on MSN Money . . .
Michael Brush

Company Focus8/28/2009 12:01 AM ET

Wall Street's high-tech war on investors

Continued from page 1

Here's one big way all this hurts the little guy:

HFT computers can detect large buy orders for a stock, the kind of buy orders mutual funds make, even when the funds try to disguise them. The HTF system can then purchase that stock before the mutual fund's order is executed. The fund ends up paying more per share, and the HTF traders pocket the difference.

This isn't illegal; it's akin to cutting into a long line at the supermarket. And it's just as infuriating. "It just ticks off mutual fund managers who feel their stock moves against them every time they show up," says Al Berkeley, chairman of Pipeline Trading Systems, a trading service designed to help institutions and brokers outsmart HFT systems that try to detect their orders.

How much does all of this cost mutual funds in higher stock prices, or lower prices when they sell? It's not clear, but one study by the Tabb Group estimates that high-frequency traders made about $21 billion in profits last year -- much of that at the expense of mutual funds.

HFT systems have their defenders. If traders can use technology to figure out when mutual funds bumble into the market with a big order, they deserve to profit from it, say analysts at Zero Hedge, a Web site for hard-core finance and investing types. That's another way of saying that mutual funds can fight back with their own technology or pay an outfit like Pipeline Trading to do it for them. "We use the same weapons that high-frequency traders are using, against them," says Berkeley. "We are arms merchants."

But remember: It's fund customers like you and me who will pay the tab.

2. Flash orders

High-frequency trading sounds even more unfair when it's used with a more controversial high-tech trick, the "flash order" -- the quick display of unfilled trading orders to a select few insiders.

Flash orders exist because, over the past few years, upstart stock exchanges like Direct Edge and BATS Exchange have cropped up to do battle with traditional outfits like the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq ($COMPX). To win trading volume, the upstarts had to offer big customers something to get their business. Enter the flash order.

Smaller exchanges have to pass along big orders to the big exchanges if it looks like they can't fill them. To avoid this loss, they "flash" these orders to big customers for less than half a second. The hope is that big players will help fill the order, splitting the fees with the small exchange.

But this also gives the insider an advance look at a trading price you and I never see. Mind you, it's a half-second advantage; you and I couldn't do anything with it anyway. But those with HFT systems can.

"The vast majority of the trading world has no way to capitalize on this, absent substantial (capital) investments to the tune of tens of millions of dollars," say analysts at Zero Hedge.

Here's another thing about flash orders that doesn't seem fair. By pinging most of the market every few milliseconds, a good HFT system can sense overall supply and demand for a stock. When it sees a flash order to buy a stock for which it knows there's limited supply, it'll go out and sop up all the available stock ahead of that order. It can then resell the stock quickly for a profit.

"They know about the order and can beat everyone to the stock because they have a faster system," says one hedge fund manager. "They front-run and drive the price up ahead of everyone else. Anybody buying stock is getting screwed, from the big mutual funds to the smallest guy buying 100 shares."

After The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal broke stories on flash orders and other electronic trading just a few weeks ago, the Securities and Exchange Commission said it would crack down on such orders and investigate related issues. Direct Edge, BATS Exchange -- and the Nasdaq, which has also offered flash orders -- all say they will stop providing them soon.

But given how profitable they are for the biggest traders, we'll have to wait and see how this plays out.

Video on MSN Money

The firestorm over flash trading © CNBC
The firestorm over flash trading
Steve Pearlstein of The Washington Post, CNBC's Bob Pisani and Michelle Caruso-Cabrera discuss whether high-frequency trading is bad for the markets.

3. Dark pools

Technology gives privileged insiders an edge in another way -- by connecting big players inside exclusive electronic trading venues. Because they are private and trading is anonymous, these secretive venues are known as "dark pools."

Inside dark pools -- like one called "Sigma X" run by Goldman Sachs and another run by Investment Technology Group -- huge amounts of stock are bought and sold every day at prices that outsiders may know nothing about until well after the fact.

This gives big players two advantages: lower fees on the actual trades and secrecy. When you're making big moves, you don't want competitors to notice what you're doing.

This creates two problems for the rest of us. First, these trades affect the value of stocks you and I own, but they're invisible to those outside the dark-pool set. "They create a very unfair playing field," says Richard Olsen, the chairman of OANDA, a currency trading platform.

Second, if enough trades move to dark pools, they will undermine the significance of publicly available prices on the regular exchanges. That's bad for the economy, because reliable stock prices are supposed to help guide investment dollars to the most deserving entrepreneurs.

In June, more than 7% of all trades happened inside dark pools, according to Rosenblatt Securities. Is that enough to undermine the public markets? The SEC says it's trying to figure that out. But since the SEC is outmatched and outgunned technologically, you have to wonder if it will do any better a job here than it did investigating Bernie Madoff.

Continued: The big meltdown risk

< previous |  1 | 2 | 3 | next >

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
Fund data provided by Morningstar, Inc. © 2009. All rights reserved.
StockScouter data provided by Gradient Analytics, Inc.
Quotes supplied by Interactive Data.
MSN Money's editorial goal is to provide a forum for personal finance and investment ideas. Our articles, columns, message board posts and other features should not be construed as investment advice, nor does their appearance imply an endorsement by Microsoft of any specific security or trading strategy. An investor's best course of action must be based on individual circumstances.
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 181
Thursday, August 27, 2009 11:57:43 PM
Trading faster is not trading better. Why is speed an unfair advantage?  Every trade has to have a buyr and a seller and one of them has to be on the wrong side of the momentum.
Friday, August 28, 2009 12:01:28 AM
"

HFT computers can detect large buy orders for a stock, the kind of buy orders mutual funds make, even when the funds try to disguise them. The HTF system can then purchase that stock before the mutual fund's order is executed. The fund ends up paying more per share, and the HTF traders pocket the difference.

This isn't illegal; it's akin to cutting into a long line at the supermarket. "

 

Oh it is very much illegal. It's called front-running. HTF systems would not be able to detect these trades unless the mutual funds placed the orders with the parent borkerages, which means those brokerages either cannot participate in the trade or have to take the opposite side of the trade.

Friday, August 28, 2009 2:58:27 AM
I bought stocks at BoA and Merril Lynch. Transactions were confirmed and done but customers would not see their clear results and money 3 days later...Is it a trap or tricks?
Friday, August 28, 2009 6:03:48 AM

I fail to understand why the Wall Street traders, HFT or otherwise, get any respect.  They add no more value to society than do the horse players at the track who add to the market efficiency of the parimutuel horse betting market.

 

Every dollar they make trading is a dollar that someone else doesn't make, and they're not adding any capital to the economy - they're taking it out.

 

Would anyone like to take at shot at explaining that?

Friday, August 28, 2009 6:13:57 AM
No mention of after-hours trading?  I do not have the ability to track markets 24 hours a day.  I can set limits in my brokerage account only to wake up to prices that have zoomed above or crashed thru my sale price.   OUCH!   Shouldn't markets be closed for everyone  
Friday, August 28, 2009 6:54:12 AM

Many floor traders and brokers have been fined, reprimanded, prosecuted, imprisoned, and had their licenses removed over the years for engaging in the exact same practices that these HFT schemes are now executing at the speed of light. It’s unconscionable to me that the exchanges and the SEC are allowing it, and in some ways even encouraging it. This is as much of a fundamental violation of fair trading practices as the mortgage market was a fundamental violation of risk management practices.

 

I’ve been a small, long-term retirement investor for 30 years and have never seen anything as disgusting as these HFT practices in the market. I’m now in the process of executing a short-term plan to get my retirement funds out of the financial markets and into other types of investments that are outside the control of Pin-Striped Pirates of Wall Street.

Friday, August 28, 2009 7:00:52 AM

What is described in this article is NOT investing, and if allowed to persist will hasten the downfall of our society.  I made a similar comment about what three of my family members starting doing back in 2003...working a mortgage broker business. Of course, they made literally millions of dollars between them over the next five years, and now 2 of the 3 have lost their homes, and we all know how what they were doing has affected our society.

 

Wall Street in its current form needs to be shut down!

Friday, August 28, 2009 7:12:45 AM

How do they figure that HFT add liquidity?  In the case of front running a big mutual fund order they simply buy shares that are already being offered for sale by owners & resell to the mutual fund at a profit.  That's a middle man collecting a profit on an unneeded service since the mutual fund would be perfectly willing to make the many smaller transactions.

 

The comment "If traders can use technology to figure out when mutual funds bumble into the market with a big order, they deserve to profit from it" is ridiculous.  Whoever said it is scum.  That mutual fund did a ton of research to 'bumble into the market'.  The HFT is simply scanning the market for opportunities to make easy money.  It's immoral which comes as no surprise since it comes from Wall Street but if the current administration truly wants change that we can believe in they will stop this immediately.

Friday, August 28, 2009 7:24:39 AM
Okay, explain just how high frequency and/or flash trading adds liquidity. It seems to me that if the programs break in and buy a stock that has just had an order placed on it in order to profit from the subsequent trade (even if only minutely per trade), it does nothing to add to liquidity, only trade volume. The trade would have been made anyway; they just add another layer and unfairly profit. If it is not already illegal (and likely is) it certainly should be.
#10
Friday, August 28, 2009 7:40:39 AM
I will take a shot at explaining it Ekonoman - it is a scam. Wall Street is a perverse mixture of ponzi scheme and casino. It is a system designed from the very beginning to favor and enrich the insiders. And as you said, all of these high earning traders, analysts, etc. produce absolutely NOTHING. All they do is run a game which helps people with money use their money to make even more money.
1 - 10 of 181
To add a comment, pleasesign in