Swift Trade

Discussion in 'Professional Trading' started by seadog, Mar 24, 2011.

  1. seadog


    All those interested in Swift Trade, look at today's National Post on Peter Beck.
  2. cstfx


  3. I <3 P.B.
  4. Swift Trade’s compliance personnel maintained unclear and insufficient records of
    trade review findings, including findings that may have suggested the occurrence of
    “spoofing”, “layering”7 or other questionable trading being executed by Swift Trade
    on behalf of the hundreds of individual traders trading on behalf of its ST Related

    “Spoofing” and “layering” are terms commonly used to describe activities that aim to affect the “bid” and/or “offer”
    price for a security. Such activities are designed to temporarily manipulate the price of a security in order to deceive
    other market participants into executing disadvantageous trades.

    This is intresting. How is this illegal. Every HFT does it millions of time a day and its ok.
  5. Chagi


  6. fanews


    It's a market 'guideline'.
    He won't go to jail maybe a fine or warning or lose his license or ban from participating in trading or own securities businesses.
    It's like player violation in hockey game etc.

    HFT machines are impossible to enforce since they don't have trading records to track or the regulators don't want to enforce market manipulation 'rules'.

    Market manipulation whether it's done by prop desk or HFT machines is illegal based on current financial regulations but is impossible to enforce since everybody is doing it. Ther is no paper trail for the HFT machine trades are too complex and can't prove in court or uneforceable in court.
    It's like the SEC just ignores it like pot laws. Everybody smoke spots it and fine is so small. Pot is same as legal.

    He is targeted because his firm is making money off the market makers in US markets. Some of the traders have never had a losing day in the last 10 years at swift. His prop firm only trades the US markets and probably making money off Goldman Sachs market making business.

    In this market in 'daytrading', it's mostly HFT machines competing with other HFT machines and market makers. there is very little or no retail participation in the market for some stocks. daily volume is zero in some stocks

    PS: these market makers and exchange operators have the record off all the net net profit/loss of all market participants and tax collectors has that record too. don't even try to hide or evade taxes if you do make a profit. these guys at the exchange know everything.

    This is intresting. How is this illegal. Every HFT does it millions of time a day and its ok. [/B][/QUOTE]
  7. “certain members of the Swift Trade group have repeatedly extended credit or provided margin to their clients”

    Isn't it the purpose of a trader joining Swift Trade?

    So helping a trader trade is wrong?

    But front running traders by Goldman Sachs and many brokers is right?

    Why does SEC target Swift Trade which helps traders but encourage those institutions which front run traders?

    The only explanation is that SEC is a government sponsored institution protecting the interests of the crooked businesses like GS.

    OK, I get it, Hank Paulson and others in charge of government organizations come from the crooked institutions. They are the SAME people!
  8. Chagi


    I would need to read through the document again to be 100% certain, but my take on this particular portion was related to corporate structure, not the relationship with individual traders. It sounds like the issue you mentioned was that various companies in the structure were lending each other money, and at least one of them was not permitted to do so due to its registration category (EMD).

    It doesn't seem like the OSC specifically has an issue with proprietary trading in general, but rather the governance of the company(s) in question.
  9. Good point, however it's not a matter of what the HFTs are doing, it's whether or not they get caught.

    Here's another article regarding a prop firm being accused of "spoofing", and they got a huge fine.

    #10     Mar 28, 2011