Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Chris Scoreboard Johnston
ParticipantI should have proofread what I typed before posting it but that is really semantics. They are both vehicles for trading the same thing so it is irrelevant. What you clearly are misinformed on is the practical side of this.
As a professional trader who routinely trades these vehicles side by side I could easily prove through hundreds of actual trades made the relative lack of liquidity and poor fills in the SPY vs the futures. The minimum tick value might be one thing but where the fills actually occur is quite another. I can easily move a 50 lot in the futures without moving the spread at all but no way could you ever trade an equivalent position in the Spiders with the same effect. There was a year where I traded the same trades exactly entered at the market with these two different vehicles at the same time, and there was an over 20% difference in the gain at the end of the year, case closed. Trust me from someone who has done this for 25 years, SPY’s are much less liquid than the futures, especially now in this environment.
Options are the most illiquid choice available, and also have the time value decay problem, but I suppose better than doing nothing at all.
ParticipantI should have proofread what I typed before posting it but that is really semantics. They are both vehicles for trading the same thing so it is irrelevant. What you clearly are misinformed on is the practical side of this.
As a professional trader who routinely trades these vehicles side by side I could easily prove through hundreds of actual trades made the relative lack of liquidity and poor fills in the SPY vs the futures. The minimum tick value might be one thing but where the fills actually occur is quite another. I can easily move a 50 lot in the futures without moving the spread at all but no way could you ever trade an equivalent position in the Spiders with the same effect. There was a year where I traded the same trades exactly entered at the market with these two different vehicles at the same time, and there was an over 20% difference in the gain at the end of the year, case closed. Trust me from someone who has done this for 25 years, SPY’s are much less liquid than the futures, especially now in this environment.
Options are the most illiquid choice available, and also have the time value decay problem, but I suppose better than doing nothing at all.
ParticipantI should have proofread what I typed before posting it but that is really semantics. They are both vehicles for trading the same thing so it is irrelevant. What you clearly are misinformed on is the practical side of this.
As a professional trader who routinely trades these vehicles side by side I could easily prove through hundreds of actual trades made the relative lack of liquidity and poor fills in the SPY vs the futures. The minimum tick value might be one thing but where the fills actually occur is quite another. I can easily move a 50 lot in the futures without moving the spread at all but no way could you ever trade an equivalent position in the Spiders with the same effect. There was a year where I traded the same trades exactly entered at the market with these two different vehicles at the same time, and there was an over 20% difference in the gain at the end of the year, case closed. Trust me from someone who has done this for 25 years, SPY’s are much less liquid than the futures, especially now in this environment.
Options are the most illiquid choice available, and also have the time value decay problem, but I suppose better than doing nothing at all.
ParticipantI should have proofread what I typed before posting it but that is really semantics. They are both vehicles for trading the same thing so it is irrelevant. What you clearly are misinformed on is the practical side of this.
As a professional trader who routinely trades these vehicles side by side I could easily prove through hundreds of actual trades made the relative lack of liquidity and poor fills in the SPY vs the futures. The minimum tick value might be one thing but where the fills actually occur is quite another. I can easily move a 50 lot in the futures without moving the spread at all but no way could you ever trade an equivalent position in the Spiders with the same effect. There was a year where I traded the same trades exactly entered at the market with these two different vehicles at the same time, and there was an over 20% difference in the gain at the end of the year, case closed. Trust me from someone who has done this for 25 years, SPY’s are much less liquid than the futures, especially now in this environment.
Options are the most illiquid choice available, and also have the time value decay problem, but I suppose better than doing nothing at all.
ParticipantIndex futures is the only way, the new rules only allow 3 days plus the day of entry before your brokerage firm will liquidate your position with or without your blessing in short side equity trades. S&P futures do not have that restriction. As a result you have to be dead on right timing wise to short individual stocks. This is one of the results of this wonderful government intervention. This takes liquidity out of the market and makes swings like we just saw in the last 45 minutes today more likely to happen. I am not sure if this applies to the SPY which is the stock proxy of the S&P futures. I do not trade that due to it being alot less liquid than the futures. If it does not and you prefer stocks to futures that might be the way to go or the Q’s if you want to short the Naz.
ParticipantIndex futures is the only way, the new rules only allow 3 days plus the day of entry before your brokerage firm will liquidate your position with or without your blessing in short side equity trades. S&P futures do not have that restriction. As a result you have to be dead on right timing wise to short individual stocks. This is one of the results of this wonderful government intervention. This takes liquidity out of the market and makes swings like we just saw in the last 45 minutes today more likely to happen. I am not sure if this applies to the SPY which is the stock proxy of the S&P futures. I do not trade that due to it being alot less liquid than the futures. If it does not and you prefer stocks to futures that might be the way to go or the Q’s if you want to short the Naz.
ParticipantIndex futures is the only way, the new rules only allow 3 days plus the day of entry before your brokerage firm will liquidate your position with or without your blessing in short side equity trades. S&P futures do not have that restriction. As a result you have to be dead on right timing wise to short individual stocks. This is one of the results of this wonderful government intervention. This takes liquidity out of the market and makes swings like we just saw in the last 45 minutes today more likely to happen. I am not sure if this applies to the SPY which is the stock proxy of the S&P futures. I do not trade that due to it being alot less liquid than the futures. If it does not and you prefer stocks to futures that might be the way to go or the Q’s if you want to short the Naz.
ParticipantIndex futures is the only way, the new rules only allow 3 days plus the day of entry before your brokerage firm will liquidate your position with or without your blessing in short side equity trades. S&P futures do not have that restriction. As a result you have to be dead on right timing wise to short individual stocks. This is one of the results of this wonderful government intervention. This takes liquidity out of the market and makes swings like we just saw in the last 45 minutes today more likely to happen. I am not sure if this applies to the SPY which is the stock proxy of the S&P futures. I do not trade that due to it being alot less liquid than the futures. If it does not and you prefer stocks to futures that might be the way to go or the Q’s if you want to short the Naz.
ParticipantIndex futures is the only way, the new rules only allow 3 days plus the day of entry before your brokerage firm will liquidate your position with or without your blessing in short side equity trades. S&P futures do not have that restriction. As a result you have to be dead on right timing wise to short individual stocks. This is one of the results of this wonderful government intervention. This takes liquidity out of the market and makes swings like we just saw in the last 45 minutes today more likely to happen. I am not sure if this applies to the SPY which is the stock proxy of the S&P futures. I do not trade that due to it being alot less liquid than the futures. If it does not and you prefer stocks to futures that might be the way to go or the Q’s if you want to short the Naz.
November 8, 2008 at 12:08 PM in reply to: Stock market set to rocket on prospects of Obama Presidency (up 250 points already) #301541ParticipantOnce again, how people that do not understand how financial markets work, and this includes the media who write about what caused the prior days move in the newspapers, make these comments is beyond me. I suspect he is trying to get everyones goat here. Obama ducked every meaningful question, so how anyone could say that speech was a market mover either way is laughable. I know he seems to be a hard core liberal from reading his posts, so I think he is just trying to stick it to you guys, and celebrate his victory. Let’s all hope Obama does well by all of us, it is time to move on and quit pouting about the outcome. Time will tell, opinions about what he might do are worthless.
However, the real reason for the bounce is that the .618 retracement off the high was 898.65 and the intraday low was 897, so almost right on the money in the SP futures. Alot of professionals especially fund managers buy into retracements at these levels, that is what caused the bounce. It is a low risk probing point during pullbacks, and a friend of mine that manages several billion is always a player at these levels. This is how markets work, fund managers don’t sell millions of shares of Microsoft or IBM they have accumulated over a several month span, in the middle of a politicians speech because of some arbitrary view of what that might mean 6 months down the road. Small frys who get emotional might, but that does not move the market, when someone sells 500 shares in a panic.
November 8, 2008 at 12:08 PM in reply to: Stock market set to rocket on prospects of Obama Presidency (up 250 points already) #301900ParticipantOnce again, how people that do not understand how financial markets work, and this includes the media who write about what caused the prior days move in the newspapers, make these comments is beyond me. I suspect he is trying to get everyones goat here. Obama ducked every meaningful question, so how anyone could say that speech was a market mover either way is laughable. I know he seems to be a hard core liberal from reading his posts, so I think he is just trying to stick it to you guys, and celebrate his victory. Let’s all hope Obama does well by all of us, it is time to move on and quit pouting about the outcome. Time will tell, opinions about what he might do are worthless.
However, the real reason for the bounce is that the .618 retracement off the high was 898.65 and the intraday low was 897, so almost right on the money in the SP futures. Alot of professionals especially fund managers buy into retracements at these levels, that is what caused the bounce. It is a low risk probing point during pullbacks, and a friend of mine that manages several billion is always a player at these levels. This is how markets work, fund managers don’t sell millions of shares of Microsoft or IBM they have accumulated over a several month span, in the middle of a politicians speech because of some arbitrary view of what that might mean 6 months down the road. Small frys who get emotional might, but that does not move the market, when someone sells 500 shares in a panic.
November 8, 2008 at 12:08 PM in reply to: Stock market set to rocket on prospects of Obama Presidency (up 250 points already) #301907ParticipantOnce again, how people that do not understand how financial markets work, and this includes the media who write about what caused the prior days move in the newspapers, make these comments is beyond me. I suspect he is trying to get everyones goat here. Obama ducked every meaningful question, so how anyone could say that speech was a market mover either way is laughable. I know he seems to be a hard core liberal from reading his posts, so I think he is just trying to stick it to you guys, and celebrate his victory. Let’s all hope Obama does well by all of us, it is time to move on and quit pouting about the outcome. Time will tell, opinions about what he might do are worthless.
However, the real reason for the bounce is that the .618 retracement off the high was 898.65 and the intraday low was 897, so almost right on the money in the SP futures. Alot of professionals especially fund managers buy into retracements at these levels, that is what caused the bounce. It is a low risk probing point during pullbacks, and a friend of mine that manages several billion is always a player at these levels. This is how markets work, fund managers don’t sell millions of shares of Microsoft or IBM they have accumulated over a several month span, in the middle of a politicians speech because of some arbitrary view of what that might mean 6 months down the road. Small frys who get emotional might, but that does not move the market, when someone sells 500 shares in a panic.
November 8, 2008 at 12:08 PM in reply to: Stock market set to rocket on prospects of Obama Presidency (up 250 points already) #301924ParticipantOnce again, how people that do not understand how financial markets work, and this includes the media who write about what caused the prior days move in the newspapers, make these comments is beyond me. I suspect he is trying to get everyones goat here. Obama ducked every meaningful question, so how anyone could say that speech was a market mover either way is laughable. I know he seems to be a hard core liberal from reading his posts, so I think he is just trying to stick it to you guys, and celebrate his victory. Let’s all hope Obama does well by all of us, it is time to move on and quit pouting about the outcome. Time will tell, opinions about what he might do are worthless.
However, the real reason for the bounce is that the .618 retracement off the high was 898.65 and the intraday low was 897, so almost right on the money in the SP futures. Alot of professionals especially fund managers buy into retracements at these levels, that is what caused the bounce. It is a low risk probing point during pullbacks, and a friend of mine that manages several billion is always a player at these levels. This is how markets work, fund managers don’t sell millions of shares of Microsoft or IBM they have accumulated over a several month span, in the middle of a politicians speech because of some arbitrary view of what that might mean 6 months down the road. Small frys who get emotional might, but that does not move the market, when someone sells 500 shares in a panic.
November 8, 2008 at 12:08 PM in reply to: Stock market set to rocket on prospects of Obama Presidency (up 250 points already) #301980ParticipantOnce again, how people that do not understand how financial markets work, and this includes the media who write about what caused the prior days move in the newspapers, make these comments is beyond me. I suspect he is trying to get everyones goat here. Obama ducked every meaningful question, so how anyone could say that speech was a market mover either way is laughable. I know he seems to be a hard core liberal from reading his posts, so I think he is just trying to stick it to you guys, and celebrate his victory. Let’s all hope Obama does well by all of us, it is time to move on and quit pouting about the outcome. Time will tell, opinions about what he might do are worthless.
However, the real reason for the bounce is that the .618 retracement off the high was 898.65 and the intraday low was 897, so almost right on the money in the SP futures. Alot of professionals especially fund managers buy into retracements at these levels, that is what caused the bounce. It is a low risk probing point during pullbacks, and a friend of mine that manages several billion is always a player at these levels. This is how markets work, fund managers don’t sell millions of shares of Microsoft or IBM they have accumulated over a several month span, in the middle of a politicians speech because of some arbitrary view of what that might mean 6 months down the road. Small frys who get emotional might, but that does not move the market, when someone sells 500 shares in a panic.
-
AuthorPosts
