Skip to main content

The Stock Market is Rigged?

You may have heard about the 60 Minutes interview with author Michael Lewis, a former Wall Street broker, author of "Liar's Poker" and "The Big Short," who has just come out with a new book entitled "Flash Boys." Lewis is an eloquent and astute critic of Wall Street's creative and predatory practices, and in his new book (and in the 60 Minutes interview) he offers evidence that the stock market is "rigged" by a cabal of high-frequency traders, abetted by stock exchanges and Wall Street firms.

The charge is entirely true. And it is also completely irrelevant to you and anyone else who practices patient investing.

Lewis is exposing a secret advantage that a surprisingly large number of professional traders, employed by large brokerage firms, are able to get when they build high-speed fiber optic cable feeds directly into the computers that match buyers and sellers of securities. Some of those traders actually have their trading computers located in the same room as the New York Stock Exchange and Nasdaq servers. And some pay extra for access to more information on who wants to buy and sell, more quickly, than would be available to you if you were sitting down at your home computer looking to buy or sell Apple Computer through a discount brokerage account.  

All of this is perfectly legal, but Lewis points out that it is also shady. Why should some buyers and sellers have millisecond advantages over others? The companies that see more of the market, more quickly, are able to jump in ahead of you and me and buy stocks at lower intraday prices, and then jump ahead 15 seconds later and sell to the highest bidder before you and I would even see that bid on our screen. They can buy the stock you put in an order for and sell it to you at a fractionally higher price through the normal market-matching mechanisms. This way, they can squeeze out additional pennies and nickels on each transaction, and if they do this thousands of times a day, it adds up to real money--millions of dollars a year.

Why is this irrelevant to you? Many of those lost dollars are coming out of the pockets of day traders, ordinary people who are foolish enough to think that they can outwit the markets by moving into and out of individual stocks several times a day, or professional traders at hedge funds who may not have access to the fastest server or a direct feed into the Nasdaq servers. There are tens of thousands of these investors, and many of them, watching the 60 Minutes report, discovered for the first time that they are getting routinely fleeced by Wall Street's money machine.  

Market makers that provide liquidity to various stocks on the exchanges – think Goldman Sachs and similar -- also have seen their profits squeezed as the high-frequency-traders (HFTs) have provided additional liquidity through their frenzied trading. This increased liquidity has actually helped decrease spread costs – differences between buy price and sell price – and net-net has benefited many investors. 

Recently I attended a study group where a trader for Dimensional Fund Advisors (DFA), one of the top 10 mutual fund firms by assets globally at $338 Billion as of 12/31/2013, was speaking on price execution costs and other trading considerations and implications. When asked what DFA’s position was in regards to HFTs, he responded that they do not see them as a negative for DFA’s trading. How come?

If you're invested for the long term, it really doesn't matter how many times the stocks you own inside of a mutual fund or ETF, or directly in your retirement account, change hands or at what price every few minutes. It doesn't even matter whether your stocks are up or down in any given month or year, so long as the underlying companies are building their value steadily over time. Your time frame is eons compared with the quick-twitch traders, who hope to be in and out of your stock in minutes rather than decades. Your mutual fund that buys when a stock seems cheap might, if it's careless or unsophisticated, give up fractions of a cent on its purchases, but that likely isn't going to have a measurable impact on your long-term investment returns.

Somehow, this important fact was lost in the 60 Minutes interview. The interview also didn't mention that things can go horribly wrong in the arcane and predatory world of rapid-fire trading. The Hall of Fame of trading losses includes $9 billion lost in credit default swaps by a single Morgan Stanley trader from 2004 through 2006, or the $7.2 billion lost by Societe Generale trader Jerome Kerviel over a few days in 2008, or the $2 billion "London whale" losses in 2012. They--and many others--used their milliseconds speed advantage to generate staggering losses, proving that even the smartest operators aren't always raking in the profits.

In the end, the interview tells us several things. First, it exposes, yet again, the fact that the Wall Street culture will go to great lengths to grab money out of the hands of unwary investors. One wishes that the 60 Minutes interviewers had asked a simple question: what economic purpose is served by fast-twitch traders, trying to make money for their wirehouse employers by purchasing and selling individual stocks multiple times a day ahead of other investors? Is this benefiting the economy in some way?

Second, the interview makes plainly clear the folly of an average investor trying to outsmart the markets with short-term trading activities.  

And finally, for those who can see the big picture that is never explained in the 60 Minutes interview, these revelations confirm the wisdom of having a long-term investment horizon. When you measure returns over three-to-ten year time horizons, the milliseconds don't matter.

It is another question as to the ethical question of whether HFTs should be permitted to have the advantage they have? If HFTs undermine the confidence in and integrity of the markets. These are important questions, as the ends of enhanced liquidity and lower execution costs for long-term investors may not justify the means of the HFTs. However, we first have to understand the issue and not just consume a sensational headline that the market is rigged.

Best Regards,

Kevin Kroskey, CFP®, MBA



Adapted with permission from Bob Veres.

Sources: http://www.cnbc.com/id/101537874
http://money.cnn.com/2014/03/30/investing/michael-lewis-flash-boys/
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/mar/31/us-stock-market-rigged-michael-lewis
http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/05/11/top-10-biggest-trading-losses-in-history/slide/7-jp-morgan-this-incident-2b/
 

Popular posts from this blog

Diversification: Disciplinarian of Disciplinarians

Disciplined diversification works when you do and even when you don't want it to. Diversification in effect forces you to sell the thing that has been doing so well in your portfolio and to buy the thing that hasn't. While this makes rational sense, it is emotionally difficult to execute. Think back to the tail end of 2008--were you selling bonds and cash to buy stocks? Most likely you weren't unless your advisor or some sort of automatic trigger did it for you. Carl Richards of www.behaviorgap.com provided a good reminder of how diversification works in a recent NY Times blog post. The diversification he discusses here is more so related to equity asset-class diversification but also touches on the three basic building blocks--equities, bonds, and cash. He doesn't discuss alternative asset classes -- an asset class that doesn't fit neatly into the three basic categories -- being used to further diversification, but that's a detailed topic for another day. ...

2013 Key Tax Proposals

On February 13, President Obama's Fiscal Year 2013 budget was released. Follow this link to get a full copy of the   2013 Budget . The   Treasury's Green Book   containing general explanations of the Administration's revenue proposals can be found here. Robert Keebler, a leading professional in the area of tax and estate planning, highlighted some of the key proposals potentially affecting taxpayers below: Extend Bush tax cuts for all but the top two brackets. The only change would be to have the 33% and 35% rates go back to their pre-2001 levels of 36% and 39.6%. Taxpayers in the top two marginal brackets would still benefit from reduced rates on the portion of their income taxed in the lower brackets. Raise the long-term capital gains rate to 20% for single taxpayers making more than $200,000 per year, $250,000 for married taxpayers filing jointly and $125,000 for married taxpayers filing separately. Tax rate on qualified dividends would revert to ordinary income t...

Should We Go Back on the Gold Standard?

If you watched the Republican presidential debates, you might have noticed that a number of  candidates yearn for a return to the gold standard—that is, that every dollar issued by the government would be backed by a comparable value in gold bars that were stashed away in a government vault. Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas argued that the dollar should have a fixed value in gold, and Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky added that printing money without backing in the precious metal destroys the value of our currency. Mike Huckabee, former governor of Arkansas, thinks that if not gold, then the dollar could be pegged to a basket of commodities. All are mostly concerned that printing money will cause runaway inflation.   But there may be several problems with this return to the fiscal system of the late 1800s and early 1900s. One is that inflation has barely budged even as the Federal Reserve Board was piling one QE stimulus on top of another, and the government was adding records amoun...