Jump to content

Talk:Dark pool

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merger proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge Sargdub (talk) 02:53, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should Dark pools of liquidity be merged into Dark liquidity? Currently, this article (Dark liquidity) links to Dark pools of liquidity with the link dark pools, which currently redirects to Dark pools of liquidity. I'd just like to see this separation reviewed by an expert in the field. – Wdfarmer (talk) 09:33, 17 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • I am also not an expert in dark liquidity pools, but after reading both articles I believe they should be merged. The Dark Liquidity article provides the real explanation and the Dark Pools article just give a list of providers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.20.212.130 (talk) 18:41, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: google scholar shows 'dark liquidity' to be most commonly used, with 97 citations (18 in news); "Dark pools of liquidity" has 79 citations (2 in news), "Dark pool trading" has 46 (4 in news) and "Dark pool liquidity" appears in only 15 sources. Dialectric (talk) 16:12, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Regulation?

[edit]

I would like to see some commentary about how this market is regulated compared to open markets. Kevink707 (talk) 17:35, 21 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Section merging required

[edit]

Seems like a few of the current sections would benefit from a bit of M&A action, but also I wondered if there are any active editors that would like to discuss how to add content about the controversies or arguments against this form of exchange. This piece in WSJ recently for example highlights some of the problems that seem to have cropped up in the course of running dark trading houses. I'll add the information and later it would easily be manipulated or rewritten or whatever. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 18:27, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Removed sections

[edit]

Some of this seems to have been written by a young professor who has drank too much coffee. No footnotes. Constant references to the second person. Let me just drop in here the sections that I'm removing and we can decide later what to do with them. The Sound and the Fury (talk) 18:41, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

NOTE, ALL OF THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THE PAGE

Imputing the existence of dark liquidity

There are a few ways to guess at the existence of dark liquidity. If you are watching the market depth and see that both the bid and offer have decreased by the same amount, you might reasonably assume that the trade was in fact made, but at a venue not visible to you. However this is unreliable, since there is the chance that two orders were simply canceled at the same time.

If you are actively trading at a dark venue and choose to take liquidity at a given price then you obviously have a piece of information known only to one other participant (the counterparty in the trade!). Additionally if you were completely filled you may reasonably assume that some more liquidity exists at the same price.

Exposing Dark liquidity

Brad Katsuyama is a financial services executive, working as the president, CEO and co-founder of the IEX, the Investors Exchange.[1] Katsuyama is also the focus of Flash Boys,[2][3] [4][5] a non-fiction book by Michael Lewis about high frequency trading (HFT) in financial markets.[6]

  1. ^ "IEX Group - About Us | A Market That Works For Investors". Iextrading.com. Retrieved 2014-04-03.
  2. ^ Weil, Jonathan (April 1, 2014). "Weil on Finance: FBI Hops on Michael Lewis Bandwagon". Bloomberg News. Retrieved April 1, 2014.
  3. ^ Bradford, Harry (April 1, 2014). "FBI Investigating High-Frequency Traders: WSJ". Huffington Post. Retrieved April 1, 2014.
  4. ^ "New York State AG Eric Schneiderman: Some high-frequency trading practices "may be illegal"". CBS This Morning. CBS News. March 31, 2014. Retrieved April 1, 2014.
  5. ^ Lewis, Michael (2014). Flash Boys: Cracking the Money Code. London, UK: Allen Lane. ISBN 9780241003633.
  6. ^ "The New York Times". nytimes.com. Retrieved 2014-04-11.

David Adam Kess (talk) 7:17, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

References

[edit]
Dark_liquidity is not funny

gpu based strategy

[edit]

hft private equities funds is gpu-based according to

my edit sentence has nothing saying about lawsuit, nonsense reason for revert — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.137.174.133 (talk) 13:41, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Dark liquidity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 23:30, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Trade? Or order?

[edit]

Article currently says (near the top)

some market participants are disadvantaged as they cannot see the trades before they are executed

I am far from an expert on this so somebody please clarify: should this refer to orders instead? One party makes an offer to sell, another to buy, but neither of these are "trades" until they execute, right? So what would it mean to see a trade before it executes? If this should say "orders" please correct the article. If "trades" is the correct word, please explain (in the article) what it means to have a "trade" that has not yet executed. Thank you. 72.208.150.248 (talk) 18:12, 22 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This has been fixed. Sargdub (talk) 11:32, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 June 2017

[edit]
The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. No opposition, and seems entirely reasonable.  — Amakuru (talk) 12:03, 29 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Dark liquidity → Dark pool – The article is mostly about dark pools themselves and this is the more common name. The liquidity is covered in the article and is obviously a key part of dark pools. There has been some previous changes but I feel the most appropriate name for this article now is dark pool after its development. There had been a previous changes and even a merge from Dark pools of liquidity which is also a common name for this concept. I feel that given the development of the article and a lot more references to this from its use in high frequency trading, it now makes sense to change it to Dark pool again. This will require an administrator as dark pool, and dark pool liquidity have been used in the past and are now redirects. Sargdub (talk) 00:20, 21 June 2017 (UTC)Sargdub (talk) 00:19, 21 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a view on whether of not this should be changed but if it is the lead needs to be changed since the term dark pool is not mentioned.--64.229.167.158 (talk) 03:53, 24 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dark_pool&oldid=1200122190"