Our privacy policy describes how Fidessa uses cookies on our website. If you continue using our website, you are consenting to our use of cookies. OK

Tick Tax

Just returned from a very stimulating week in Japan where I was asked to present on High Frequency Trading and global fragmentation at the Japan International Banking & Securities Systems Forum. There was a great point made by Chuck Chon, CTO of SBI Japannext, when he was asked how his alternative venue differentiated itself from the mighty TSE. Amongst other points, Chuck confirmed that SBI was committed to lower tick sizes as this has the effect of narrowing the bid-offer spread for any particular stock. He went on to say that crossing the bid-offer spread is like a tax that is levied every time anybody (retail or institutional) participates in the market. The challenge, however, is that traditional market makers actually like a wide spread as they are the ones who are effectively charging the “tax” in the first place. High velocity HFT firms, on the other hand, prefer very low spreads as they are constantly in and out of the market.

So primary markets have to decide whether to maintain a higher tick size, which keeps their traditional market makers happy, or bow to the pressure from the HFT community. This reminded me of a similar debate in Europe and especially in the Nordic market where NASDAQ OMX Nordic only reluctantly agreed to reduce tick sizes when they came under stiff competition from the MTF community.

This whole issue seems to highlight the differences between the traditional business models for equity trading and the new world order that is emerging. The bizarre thing is that, at least in the case of tick sizes, the interests of the HFT community and the retail punter seem very well aligned.

Anyway, my thanks to everyone at Fidessa kk in Japan and especially to Hiroshi Matsubara for being such a great host and guide.

Comments
One Response to “Tick Tax”
  1. Electronic Broker says:

    Clearly tighter spreads are good for the market.

    However a tick size war as seen historically in the US is not good for the market.

    Thus comptetition on tick size should be lower on the list of methods of differentiation for exchanges and MTFs. If venues compete aggressively on Tick size then prices risk moving to absurd numbers of decimals as each venue tries to out do the next, the resulting load on systems as market data volumes increase and everyone has to support increased decimals, as well as lack of clarity on price as prices “lock” (or backwardise as people chase rebates) risk harming the market.

Leave a comment

Copyright © 2018 Fidessa group plc. All rights reserved.

The information contained within this website is provided for informational purposes only. Fidessa will use reasonable care to ensure that information is accurate at the time it is made available, and for the duration that it remains on the site. The information may be changed by Fidessa at any time without notice. We also reserve the right to close the website at any time. No representation or warranty, expressed or implied, is given on behalf of Fidessa or any of its respective directors, employees, agents, or advisers as to the accuracy or completeness of the information or opinions contained herein or its suitability for any purpose and, save in the case of fraud, all liability for direct, indirect, special, consequential or other loss or damages of whatever kind that may arise from use of the website is hereby excluded to the fullest extent permitted by law. Any decisions you make based on the information in this website are your sole responsibility and information on the website should not be relied upon in connection with any investment decision.

The copyright of this website belongs to Fidessa. All other intellectual property rights are reserved.

Fragulator® is a registered trademark of Fidessa group plc.

Reproduction or redistribution of this information is prohibited except with written permission from Fidessa.