Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system


Forgot your password?

Futures Trader Arrested For Causing 2010 'Flash Crash' 300

Posted by Soulskill
from the moving-at-the-speed-of-government dept.
New submitter dfsmith writes: Apparently the "Flash Crash" of the stock market in May 2010 was perpetrated by a futures trader in the UK. The US Justice Department alleges that he used a "dynamic layering scheme" of large-volume sell orders to confuse other buyers, hence winning big in his futures trades. "By allegedly placing multiple, simultaneous, large-volume sell orders at different price points—a technique known as 'layering'—Sarao created the appearance of substantial supply in the market. As part of the scheme, Sarao allegedly modified these orders frequently so that they remained close to the market price, and typically canceled the orders without executing them. When prices fell as a result of this activity, Sarao allegedly sold futures contracts only to buy them back at a lower price. Conversely, when the market moved back upward as the market activity ceased, Sarao allegedly bought contracts only to sell them at a higher price."

Comment: Re:Strictly speaking... (Score 1) 417

Let's be clear here. You cannot infer anything beyond the Nyquist limit. However, if your average resolution limit is 1m years and you are not seeing major changes more rapid that 10m years, there is an extremely low likelihood that there are any processes operating at a lower frequency than that. (I would imagine the samples are somewhat stochastic.)

I do not know what the resolution limits are for this data nor what sort constraints the data provide. My only point is that one must be precise when speaking about these sorts of things. "Rapid changes" and "low resolution" are meaningless terms.

An elephant is a mouse with an operating system.