实施高频交易监管:对当前改革的批判性分析

M. Morelli
{"title":"实施高频交易监管:对当前改革的批判性分析","authors":"M. Morelli","doi":"10.36639/mbelr.6.2.implementing","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Technological developments in securities markets, most notably high frequency trading, have fundamentally changed the structure and nature of trading over the past fifty years. Policymakers, both domestically and abroad, now face many new challenges influencing the secondary market’s effectiveness as a generator of economic growth and stability. Faced with these rapid structural changes, many are quick to denounce high frequency trading as opportunistic and parasitic. This article, however, instead argues that while high frequency trading presents certain general risks to secondary market efficiency, liquidity, stability, and integrity, the practice encompasses a wide variety of strategies, many of which can enhance, not inhibit, the secondary trading market’s core goals.\n\nThis article proposes a regulatory model aimed at maximizing high frequency trading’s beneficial effects on secondary market functions. The model’s foundation, however, requires information. By analyzing more data on how high frequency traders interact with markets, regulators can assess the viability and scope of other potentially worthwhile measures targeting more general market threats. Likewise, regulators can determine who is in the best position to bear supervisory responsibility for particular trading activities: agencies, exchanges, traders, or some combination thereof. Crucially, the model also calls on regulators to share information on a global scale: trading no longer only affects a single exchange, a single asset class, or even a single country. By sharing information, regulators can enact more informed regulations, stabilize secondary markets, and minimize regulatory arbitrage. In short, high frequency trading can be a force for good, but a principled and coordinated effort is needed to ensure it fulfills that potential.","PeriodicalId":333345,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Implementing High Frequency Trading Regulation: A Critical Analysis of Current Reforms\",\"authors\":\"M. Morelli\",\"doi\":\"10.36639/mbelr.6.2.implementing\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Technological developments in securities markets, most notably high frequency trading, have fundamentally changed the structure and nature of trading over the past fifty years. Policymakers, both domestically and abroad, now face many new challenges influencing the secondary market’s effectiveness as a generator of economic growth and stability. Faced with these rapid structural changes, many are quick to denounce high frequency trading as opportunistic and parasitic. This article, however, instead argues that while high frequency trading presents certain general risks to secondary market efficiency, liquidity, stability, and integrity, the practice encompasses a wide variety of strategies, many of which can enhance, not inhibit, the secondary trading market’s core goals.\\n\\nThis article proposes a regulatory model aimed at maximizing high frequency trading’s beneficial effects on secondary market functions. The model’s foundation, however, requires information. By analyzing more data on how high frequency traders interact with markets, regulators can assess the viability and scope of other potentially worthwhile measures targeting more general market threats. Likewise, regulators can determine who is in the best position to bear supervisory responsibility for particular trading activities: agencies, exchanges, traders, or some combination thereof. Crucially, the model also calls on regulators to share information on a global scale: trading no longer only affects a single exchange, a single asset class, or even a single country. By sharing information, regulators can enact more informed regulations, stabilize secondary markets, and minimize regulatory arbitrage. In short, high frequency trading can be a force for good, but a principled and coordinated effort is needed to ensure it fulfills that potential.\",\"PeriodicalId\":333345,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-09-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.6.2.implementing\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Business & Entrepreneurial Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36639/mbelr.6.2.implementing","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

过去50年来,证券市场的技术发展,尤其是高频交易,从根本上改变了交易的结构和性质。国内外的政策制定者现在都面临着许多新的挑战,这些挑战影响着二级市场作为经济增长和稳定引擎的有效性。面对这些快速的结构性变化,许多人很快就谴责高频交易是机会主义和寄生性的。然而,本文认为,虽然高频交易对二级市场的效率、流动性、稳定性和完整性构成一定的一般风险,但这种做法包含了各种各样的策略,其中许多策略可以增强而不是抑制二级交易市场的核心目标。本文提出了一个旨在使高频交易对二级市场功能的有利影响最大化的监管模式。然而,模型的基础需要信息。通过分析更多有关高频交易员如何与市场互动的数据,监管机构可以评估针对更普遍的市场威胁的其他可能有价值措施的可行性和范围。同样,监管机构可以确定谁最适合承担特定交易活动的监管责任:机构、交易所、交易员,或它们的某种组合。至关重要的是,该模型还呼吁监管机构在全球范围内共享信息:交易不再只影响单一交易所、单一资产类别,甚至一个国家。通过共享信息,监管机构可以制定更明智的法规,稳定二级市场,并最大限度地减少监管套利。简而言之,高频交易可以是一种好的力量,但需要有原则和协调的努力来确保它发挥潜力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Implementing High Frequency Trading Regulation: A Critical Analysis of Current Reforms
Technological developments in securities markets, most notably high frequency trading, have fundamentally changed the structure and nature of trading over the past fifty years. Policymakers, both domestically and abroad, now face many new challenges influencing the secondary market’s effectiveness as a generator of economic growth and stability. Faced with these rapid structural changes, many are quick to denounce high frequency trading as opportunistic and parasitic. This article, however, instead argues that while high frequency trading presents certain general risks to secondary market efficiency, liquidity, stability, and integrity, the practice encompasses a wide variety of strategies, many of which can enhance, not inhibit, the secondary trading market’s core goals. This article proposes a regulatory model aimed at maximizing high frequency trading’s beneficial effects on secondary market functions. The model’s foundation, however, requires information. By analyzing more data on how high frequency traders interact with markets, regulators can assess the viability and scope of other potentially worthwhile measures targeting more general market threats. Likewise, regulators can determine who is in the best position to bear supervisory responsibility for particular trading activities: agencies, exchanges, traders, or some combination thereof. Crucially, the model also calls on regulators to share information on a global scale: trading no longer only affects a single exchange, a single asset class, or even a single country. By sharing information, regulators can enact more informed regulations, stabilize secondary markets, and minimize regulatory arbitrage. In short, high frequency trading can be a force for good, but a principled and coordinated effort is needed to ensure it fulfills that potential.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信