Log in or Sign up

ET News & Sponsor Info

General Topics

Markets

Technical Topics

Brokerage Firms

Company Specific

Interactive Brokers

Tools of the Trade

Trading for a Living

Community Lounge

Site Support

Feedback

SPOOFING is LEGAL light gray area after NY Judges ruling

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by REDP1800, Dec 7, 2018.

REDP1800
- 662
  Posts
- 137
  Likes
bone said:
If a whale puts a 2000 lot bid five below the currently trading bid - and is simultaneously working offers that get filled, yeah that’s spoofing. But to answer your question about why he pulls his bid before the market gets there - he knows he’ll get filled and he’s surely already quite long I’d guess. Big orders AT the market get filled.

Hundreds of contract orders are quite common in the ES. I’ve met at least a dozen day traders over the years who’d take a thousand lot in ES. I worked with David Ellis for three years and he’d take a hell of a lot more than that. I honestly can’t explain the practical or even the gamesmanship utility in flashing something like a three hundred lot.[/QUOT
More...

bone said:
I have to disagree. What Don Wilson and DRW did was NOT spoofing. DRW placed RESTING orders into the order book away from the market but within legal daily trading limits and left them there to be filled during the entire 15 minute closing period. They weren’t crossing trades or placing then canceling big orders in order to induce other traders to fill smaller DRW orders.
More...

so you let me get this straight? you actually think that in teh futures the orders on teh book are real and won't be cancelled. DO yu think more limit orders are filled or replaced and or cancelled?

#31 Dec 9, 2018

Share
REDP1800
- 662
  Posts
- 137
  Likes
REDP1800 said:
so you let me get this straight? you actually think that in teh futures the orders on teh book are real and won't be cancelled. DO yu think more limit orders are filled or replaced and or cancelled?
More...

lol.. you have met lot so day traders who put on 1000 lots in the ES.. right. Those aren't day trades they are hedgers

#32 Dec 9, 2018

Share
bone
- 10,517
  Posts
- 4,590
  Likes
By chance is that data showing implied and conditional orders?

Gotcha said:
If you ask me, spoofing is 100% utilized day in and day out by everyone out there and the SEC are blind, dumb, or paid off. Lets look at several examples that to me show how crazy it is out there. If someone has a good explanation for some of this activity, I'm all ears. All examples are taken from the NQ from just yesterday and these are 1 second bars. I realize that the spoofing that many people talk about might happen on the millisecond time frame, which the human eye might not even see, but there are lots of example on a longer time frame as well.

In this example we see a heavy bid at 6660, and as price approaches, it pulls. If you're trying to get filled at this level, why pull just as price comes down into it?

View attachment 195519

Next example. Red arrow shows the bid only getting heavy once price takes off. Why on earth put a bid in there once price has already taken off? Ok, you say you want to get filled at that level, fine, why not then wait, cause when price gets to the blue arrow, you can get in at that level, but of course the heavy bid is gone. Who knows, maybe they got filled higher, if they really wanted to, but it makes no sense for who ever put that bid there after price has taken off, except to fuck with other algos.

Look at also the green arrow now. Bid appears when price is still many levels above it. Then, just as price gets down to this level, it pulls. It literally stops one tick shy, and then the bid is instantly cancelled.

View attachment 195520

Same stuff happens in the ES. Red arrow, you see a heavy ask appear just as price drops lower. Some of it trades, and price goes down a couple of ticks, but the order is quickly pulled. Did this seller really want to sell or where they just trying to push price down? They had the option to sell more at that price in only a few seconds, but the order was pulled.

At the green arrow, same thing. Heavy bid appears, price shoots up in response, and quickly comes back down, but the order pulls. If the buyer wanted it, they could have gotten more. Maybe they did, without placing limit orders, who knows, but why does it pull if the order was legit?

View attachment 195521

The point is that when you've been watching this stuff long enough, you see that the limit book doesn't really reflect what traders want to do. Isn't the most basic definition of spoofing placing order you don't intend to fill? I know that people trade for lots of different reasons, like hedging and stuff like this, but these reasons shouldn't change by the second. If your orders appear and disappear as price nears, you're clearly not looking to participate, but to fuck around.

I feel really bad for that Nav guy who went to jail for doing exactly what is still happening today on a monumental scale. The SEC is only working for the people with the deepest pockets.
More...

#33 Dec 9, 2018

Share
REDP1800
- 662
  Posts
- 137
  Likes
Overnight said:
Remember that the SEC has no bearing on futures, that is the CFTC. Just a technical point of order there.
More...

agreed on teh jursidiction but what is in the chart is in there..spoofing happens all the time. YOU CANNOT BE TOLD your orders are held and other participants can cancel.

#34 Dec 9, 2018

Share
REDP1800
- 662
  Posts
- 137
  Likes
Gotcha said:
If you ask me, spoofing is 100% utilized day in and day out by everyone out there and the SEC are blind, dumb, or paid off. Lets look at several examples that to me show how crazy it is out there. If someone has a good explanation for some of this activity, I'm all ears. All examples are taken from the NQ from just yesterday and these are 1 second bars. I realize that the spoofing that many people talk about might happen on the millisecond time frame, which the human eye might not even see, but there are lots of example on a longer time frame as well.

In this example we see a heavy bid at 6660, and as price approaches, it pulls. If you're trying to get filled at this level, why pull just as price comes down into it?

View attachment 195519

Next example. Red arrow shows the bid only getting heavy once price takes off. Why on earth put a bid in there once price has already taken off? Ok, you say you want to get filled at that level, fine, why not then wait, cause when price gets to the blue arrow, you can get in at that level, but of course the heavy bid is gone. Who knows, maybe they got filled higher, if they really wanted to, but it makes no sense for who ever put that bid there after price has taken off, except to fuck with other algos.

Look at also the green arrow now. Bid appears when price is still many levels above it. Then, just as price gets down to this level, it pulls. It literally stops one tick shy, and then the bid is instantly cancelled.
excellent post andv ery relevant. thanks
View attachment 195520

Same stuff happens in the ES. Red arrow, you see a heavy ask appear just as price drops lower. Some of it trades, and price goes down a couple of ticks, but the order is quickly pulled. Did this seller really want to sell or where they just trying to push price down? They had the option to sell more at that price in only a few seconds, but the order was pulled.

At the green arrow, same thing. Heavy bid appears, price shoots up in response, and quickly comes back down, but the order pulls. If the buyer wanted it, they could have gotten more. Maybe they did, without placing limit orders, who knows, but why does it pull if the order was legit?

View attachment 195521

The point is that when you've been watching this stuff long enough, you see that the limit book doesn't really reflect what traders want to do. Isn't the most basic definition of spoofing placing order you don't intend to fill? I know that people trade for lots of different reasons, like hedging and stuff like this, but these reasons shouldn't change by the second. If your orders appear and disappear as price nears, you're clearly not looking to participate, but to fuck around.

I feel really bad for that Nav guy who went to jail for doing exactly what is still happening today on a monumental scale. The SEC is only working for the people with the deepest pockets.
More...

#35 Dec 9, 2018

Share
REDP1800
- 662
  Posts
- 137
  Likes
doubtful it is implied or conditional

https://quantitativebrokers.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/hiddenliquidity.pdf

#36 Dec 9, 2018

Share
Gotcha
- 1,084
  Posts
- 629
  Likes
bone said:
By chance is that data showing implied and conditional orders?
More...

Not sure, it's just the resting limit orders. For NQ, these levels might only be 30 or 40 contracts. So if someone puts in a market order to buy or sell 500, 10 or more levels are taken out instantly.

#37 Dec 9, 2018

Share
REDP1800
- 662
  Posts
- 137
  Likes
manipulations slightly revealed
- interpretations-market-manipulation.pdf
  
  File size:
  
  376.2 KB
  
  Views:
  
  12
#38 Dec 10, 2018

Share
REDP1800
- 662
  Posts
- 137
  Likes
https://www.trlm.com/knowledgebase/makes-spoofing-different-layering/

#39 Dec 10, 2018

Share
REDP1800
- 662
  Posts
- 137
  Likes
more papers on the subject of spoofing. this will give you insight into how the market works and how it is traded (manipulated) ha ha .
- Spoofing 2018.pdf
  
  File size:
  
  1.1 MB
  
  Views:
  
  12
- spoofing 2018 2.pdf
  
  File size:
  
  156.3 KB
  
  Views:
  
  11
#40 Dec 10, 2018

Share

(You must log in or sign up to reply here.)

Search