The slower traders began issuing buy orders. But rather than being shown to all potential sellers at the same time, some of those orders were most likely routed to a collection of high-frequency traders for just 30 milliseconds — 0.03 seconds — in what are known as flash orders. While markets are supposed to ensure transparency by showing orders to everyone simultaneously, a loophole in regulations allows marketplaces like Nasdaq to show traders some orders ahead of everyone else in exchange for a fee.
In less than half a second, high-frequency traders gained a valuable insight: the hunger for Broadcom was growing. Their computers began buying up Broadcom shares and then reselling them to the slower investors at higher prices. The overall price of Broadcom began to rise.
Soon, thousands of orders began flooding the markets as high-frequency software went into high gear. Automatic programs began issuing and canceling tiny orders within milliseconds to determine how much the slower traders were willing to pay. The high-frequency computers quickly determined that some investors’ upper limit was $26.40. The price shot to $26.39, and high-frequency programs began offering to sell hundreds of thousands of shares.
The result is that the slower-moving investors paid $1.4 million for about 56,000 shares, or $7,800 more than if they had been able to move as quickly as the high-frequency traders.
Multiply such trades across thousands of stocks a day, and the profits are substantial. High-frequency traders generated about $21 billion in profits last year, the Tabb Group, a research firm, estimates.
If this doesn’t cry out for a nice strong dose of regulation, I don’t know what does.
Applaud the Times for this excellent piece of reporting, and for giving it the play it deserves. Applaud Reuters and the blog Zero Hedge for hammering on this.
Let’s hope Congress and the administration pay attention. To ensure that, we’re going to need much more reporting on this area.

So the slower traders need to get faster! Speed has always been a competitive advantage in trading. To argue that regulators ought to protect the slower traders is an argument to shackle those who are pushing the markets into the future, to stifle innovation. Those who are complaining the loudest are merely those who have a vested interest in the status quo. Get on the bus. Computerized, high-frequency trading is the future.
#1 Posted by Mick, CJR on Fri 24 Jul 2009 at 01:47 PM
Clearly you have never traded and seen your account get wiped out. The problem is people believe the sec would never allow such price manipulation they also work hard for there money, They don't buy 35,000 dollar commodes like some wall st aholes that should be locked up. Yet we stuck Martha Stewart in jail. Makes a lot of freaken sense dont it
#2 Posted by Mike, CJR on Sat 25 Jul 2009 at 05:56 PM
RE: MICK
HOW DOES AN AVERAGE "JOE" LIKE ME Get on the bus. Computerized, high-frequency trading is the future.
??PLEASE ADVISE
#3 Posted by STEVE, CJR on Sun 26 Jul 2009 at 08:59 AM
RE: MICK
HOW DOES AN AVERAGE "JOE" LIKE ME Get on the bus. Computerized, high-frequency trading is the future.
??PLEASE ADVISE
#4 Posted by JOE, CJR on Sun 26 Jul 2009 at 09:00 AM