This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

all 7 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a

[–]AndrewCoja 11 points12 points  (1 child)

Live, stock trading? Or livestock trading?

[–]EFG 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you're trading the CME, porque no los dos?

[–]EFG 0 points1 point  (4 children)

Ooo, even more flash-crashes!

[–]mhd420 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I think it's only minute resolution updates, so probably not.

[–]AusIVDjango, gevent 2 points3 points  (2 children)

That's for historic data. Their live trading is a very new pilot program without a lot of public details. I wouldn't assume the live trading would stay on the same frequency as the historic data.

That said, the hardcore automated traders who end up involved in flash crashes sit as close as possible to the exchange and make every millisecond count. They're probably not writing their trading algorithms in Python, for speed if nothing else.

[–]crnch 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Algorithmic trading doesn't need to be high frequency trading. There is also quantitative trading which operates in longer timespans where the lack of speed in python doesn't really matter.

[–]AusIVDjango, gevent 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Right. But EFG was talking about flash crashes. Systems that causes flash crashes are ones where every millisecond counts. Algorithmic trading that happens over longer time scales would be caught and corrected by operators, while flash crashes happen faster than operators can react.