Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
1) If you know where I'm going to buy, then you're the reason that I'm buying. I know that this probably seems flippant and argumentative so I'll expand on it. Scalpers are looking for the next guy who has a reason to buy 10k. Grady trades treasury futures. There are times in the ZN when it'll take 15k to clear a price, so knowing who is going to buy 10k can be very useful information.
If you know that I'm going to buy at 10, and you frontrun me by buying 4k at 11, then that's one more reason for me to buy. You help create the reason for me to get long. If you're buying 11, then chances are you're willing to buy 12 and maybe even 13. I'll buy somewhere in there as well, and then I'll look for signs that you're done buying. If you're long on average at 12, you might keep buying 13s into your offer at 14, 15, and 16. Then, as you scale out size at 14/15/16, I'll offer out there as well.
This is what he means by it being Manna from Heaven. At the core, scalpers look for momentum. If you're willing to contribute to that momentum, then you're a scalper's best friend.
2) Not to speak for Grady, but I believe that not caring about sharing because the competition is better isn't what he means by the statement. For scalpers of any size less than 500 in ZN (by a very rough guess), you really don't represent any competition whatsoever to any other market participant. If retail folks could trade 1500 in ZN, then that would be a different issue. The market would be completely changed. I think more to his point is what he mentioned; if all 20 traders hit a 50 lot to total 1000 contracts, then that motion might represent one domino in a chain of dominoes to fall. If there are enough people trading enough size that do exactly what he (or any other trader) does, then it's pretty damn easy for him to get paid on the trade. Or, at least, get a free look on the trade.
3) I realize that this is simply a random situation you're outlining so we can't really take it at face value. However, it takes more than 6 months to learn to trade. Even if a trader had 20 years of a track record, I would still expect it to take longer than 6 months and $50k to create a "good strategy" out of the blue.
1. Okay, right so you shared the problem in your analysis. We'll also be offering out at the same prices: so we can't all get the exit. And we got in at random prices. Even if all the traders only moved the market 1 tick then that's a problem, it means you will be giving up at least 1/2 tick on average. It is 1/2 tick because 50% of time you will get in before the others and 50% after. On the exit, you can also expect -- even if it is 1 tick then that's another 50% or a total of 1 tick. There are very few specific scenarios where this can benefit you. The only real scenario is that if you can drive up the price enough to trigger stop losses or entice new buyers. I should point out that any trading designed with the intention to create a disruption is prohibited. But even if you trigger the stop losses, you only need enough buyers to trigger those stops. You don't need more. Why? Because there won't be but so many stops. It means you still have a constraining factor.
2. Look you can use a limit order or a market order. Both are constrained by scarcity in time/price.
3. It is very possible to develop a quantitative/systematic strategy in 6 months (even 1-3 months). The 50k is your time cost for the development of the strategy. My point is if you spend 6 months on a strategy at average ~20 hours per week at a professional rate, you have to make 25k-50k to cover your time cost. This is a real problem if you are an independent trader with limited capital. On the other hand if you can sell the strategy for $1k: you only need to sell 25-50 copies to recoup your time cost. More importantly, you did that without taking market risk.
Rather than say that either one of our analyses is problematic, let's just suppose that they differ in view.
You mention the only time it matters is when people drive up the price to trigger stop losses. This is what everybody's trying to do every single day in the market! Maybe there's a legitimate Corn farmer who puts on a couple of ZC to truly hedge his crop. But everybody else is trying to screw over everybody else!
I would absolutely love it if my 1 lot created such a disruption that somebody had to buy 10,000 in response. Because that means that I'm getting paid in a huge way! Spoofing goes on all the time too--it can be disruptive but it's part of playing the game.
It's not about competing for the fill. Maybe if you traded SI at 500 per clip then you'd have an issue with getting your fills. Let's suppose that some given market is very thin and that 500 lot trader Jim can only get on 20 of his 500 before everybody else sees him and front runs him. That's still a great position to be in! Now Jim has partial size on and he's getting paid for it almost immediately, because all of those other orders are helping push the market in his favor. Soon enough, there will be other people who join the side. This pushes it even more in his favor... And Jim is free to put on more size at any time to even further exacerbate the move.
Exiting the position is simply a matter of finding the point at which "the flush" happens. Assuming that Jim knows what he's doing, he will scatter orders throughout the market to exit as it pushes in his favor (again, if he's a large player in a thin market). When the market hits an inflection point, the losing side is going to have to exit. They'll bail right into Jim's orders to exit. In the extreme case in which an untold number of traders are watching over Jim's shoulder, and clicking along with him, there still isn't a huge issue. If Jim hits the market button to get in, everybody jumps on board with him, he's staring at an immediate winner, and the last guy to the party is on the hook for being slow. If he hits the market button to exit, he will still be out before the move comes back in his face.
But in a more realistic, thicker market, this issue really drops away.