Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

thetradingdoctor

Short Selling Tick Test-- Bye Bye!

Recommended Posts

SEC: Short-Selling Tick Test Is History

Jun-14-2007 | Source: Hedge Fund Daily

 

 

The Securities and Exchange Commission has unanimously voted to end the so-called “tick test,†which means short sellers will no longer be restricted from selling shares they don’t own just because the price is falling. The test, introduced in 1938 and applied only to listed securities other than those listed on the Nasdaq, after it was believed that short selling would have a negative impact in a declining market. Three years ago, the SEC embarked on a one-year pilot program to suspend the test, and has concluded that the general consensus was that that SEC “should remove price test restrictions because they modestly reduce liquidity and do not appear necessary to prevent manipulation.†Furthermore, says the commission, “the empirical evidence did not provide strong support for extending a price test to either small or thinly traded securities not currently subject to a price test.†The SEC also voted to adopt final amendments to Rules 200 and 2003 of Regulation SHO, aimed at reducing naked short selling, that would eliminate grandfather provisions regarding fail-to-deliver positions. The commission also has reproposed amendments aimed at further reducing fails to deliver in certain equity securities by eliminating the options market maker exception to the close-out requirement of Regulation SHO. The new rules will go into effect 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

 

http://institutionalinvestor.com/Article.aspx?ArticleID=1377545

 

 

Have a great weekend, all!

 

Janice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More Bye Bye! Seems like lots of saying goodbye these past few days.

 

Anyway---- Bye Bye ER2 ( Russell 2000 minis)! Looks like they will stop trading sometime in mid-September and then who knows what will happen?

 

 

Reminds me of that beautiful song by Sara Brightman and Andreas Boccelli:

 

YouTube - TIME TO SAY GOODBYE

 

Bye Bye For Now ;-)

 

Janice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cooter

Look for the Merc to make a push for their mini S&P MidCap400 contract (same tick/point value as the current Russell 2000 mini). Keep in mind that the real money is in the large RL pit-traded Russell 2000 contract, so this is the contract that the "big boys" will be really concerned about.

 

Also, you'll be able to trade the mini-Russell on the ICE platform from the NYBOT - although most brokers probably aren't setup for trading on it yet electronically. This is another reason to give FCMs a reason to use the ICE to trade electronically.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The SEC has approved amendments rule 10a-1 to remove the "short sale tick test" requirement effective Friday, July 6th, 2007.

 

Effective Friday, July 6, traders will be able to short all securities without a required up tick, up bid, or short exempt designation.

 

 

Please refer to the following for additional information:

 

http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2007/34-55970.pdf

 

http://www.sec.gov/news/speech/2006/spch120406ccc-10a.htm

http://www.sec.gov/news/press/2007/2007-114.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cooter

Nickm,

Thanks for providing the definitive word on this.

 

Hopefully this topic and source material can be made into a sticky, or added to the forthcoming wiki.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the abolition of the 60+ year old uptick rule will have a fundamental effect on market mechanics. Internals like tick, trin, put-call will have to be recalibrated to allow for this profound change. It is truly surprising that this very important change has received so little attention. I can recall in my Prop Shop days the compliance officer hovering over my desk insisting I sign an Uptick rule liability waiver or I would be suspended from trading.

Think about it for a moment - no longer does there have to be price improvement before shorting. In other words, hedgies, brokers, banks, props and other big players can hammer the hell out of the bid with impunity. As we all know, as the cash index falls, large program trades are triggered to exploit this arbitrage opportunity and bring the premium back in line.

Watch the tape velocity to the downside as this happens - it is remarkable. All the noise about the sub-prime implosion is just exacerbated by the removal of this market protection.

Perhaps, the "bear raids" of the 1920s-1930s are coming back!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cooter
  Minetoo said:
It is truly surprising that this very important change has received so little attention.

 

Actually, it has received quite a bit of attention, especially with regards to the $TICK levels now being out of whack. But the true impact on the markets has yet to be realized by the general public, as those "bear raids" could fast become the norm again, after 60+ years. You only have to look at the volatility of the past few weeks to see the potential damage that could arise as a result.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  Minetoo said:
I think the abolition of the 60+ year old uptick rule will have a fundamental effect on market mechanics.

 

I was so happy when I heard this rule has finally been abolished. In my opinion the rule gave the bulls an un-fair advantage. Now stocks can plummet into a hole at normal speed (just as stocks are allowed to fly up at normal speed) - giving more balance to the market. Bring on the bear raids, i'll be right there rolling the ball.

 

Bear raids are healthy for the market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  The Bear said:
I was so happy when I heard this rule has finally been abolished. In my opinion the rule gave the bulls an un-fair advantage. Now stocks can plummet into a hole at normal speed (just as stocks are allowed to fly up at normal speed) - giving more balance to the market. Bring on the bear raids, i'll be right there rolling the ball.

 

Bear raids are healthy for the market.

 

Unfortunately the investor class would strongly disagree with your take since they have the silly goal of price appreciation in mind. Perhaps the SEC should legalize naked short selling too?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

anyone who thinks this rule change is the cause of the volatility hasn't been trading very long. 'volatility storms' are a normal part of market behavior and existed frequently prior to the most recent 4-year period of unusually low volatility. Look at the VIX on a 15 year weekly chart and you will see that recent market behavior is not anything special.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless you are in your 90's, no one on these boards has ever traded without this rule in place. Consequently, how could we possibly conclude its impact with such a microscopically small sample period?

Do not confuse a contributing factor with a cause.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest cooter
  Minetoo said:
Unless you are in your 90's, no one on these boards has ever traded without this rule in place. Consequently, how could we possibly conclude its impact with such a microscopically small sample period?

Do not confuse a contributing factor with a cause.

 

You only have to compare the $TICK levels above +1000 before and after the uptick rule was removed to recognize the impact.

 

Since this is Dr. Janice's thread, I'd like to hear her seasoned perspective on all of this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree with Cooter's take on this, esp as regards the $TICK levels. How often are you seeing $TICK above 1000 since the short-selling rule was abolished? How often did you see it before? In addition to the state of confusion re: subprime mess, lack of transparency, lack of confidence and illiquidity in the bond markets---the "Bye Bye to Short Selling Tick Test" appears to be affecting market volatility in a significant manner. These markets are more deceptive than ever. I just sent out a "Little Shop Of Horrors" Alert. We are in no-man's land right now, waiting for the next pearl to drop from the lips of the almighty Fed. No matter what you think about the Fed, don't fight them. And- get used to the volatility, as it is likely to be around for some time. It is the absence of the short selling tick test plus the number of uncertain factors plaguing these markets at this time that will contribute to and continue this volatilty. There may be hope for reprieve from it in mid-Sept, but I wouldn't bet money on it right now. For market history buffs, the pattern of the DJIA in 2007 most closely resembles that of1946.

 

Thanks!

 

Doctor Janice

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That may partly explain why in July '07 a record high - for years - short sold stocks number has been recorded. Some misquided market analysts expected another bull rally following such a display of pessimism.

 

A big change in my opinion - aren't markets driven by (unreasonable and reasonable) perceptions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Doc i finally read this article. Here's my comments:

 

>I cannot see how that does not cause more volatility

 

This is purely an opinion piece. This person has ZERO DATA to back up their conclusions.

 

>This will make the price become oversold to a point where value investors step >in and cause the stock to whip back up. The whip back up will be exaggerated >due to the fact that short-sellers now need to cover and buy at any price.

 

This WILL do that, and this WILL happen. Unless you have access to the data that matters, it's impossible to come to these conclusions, even by looking at the TICK. I've been watching the TICK and the DOW for some time before the removal of the rule....and I've witnessed many 1000 readings.

 

>The specialist and market makers have a new dynamic to contend with now >after the rule change. Before, they could see short sellers in their book >waiting for up-ticks to be executed.

 

Exactly, they have some advantage here, and now it's been taken away from them for the better. Additionally all this talk about Specialist is sort of dated. The specialist system is slowly diminishing. The NYSE Hybrid system pretty much killed most of them. The floor is a very sleepy place these days, simply because they can't make as much money anymore.

 

I personally would be OK to see all of them removed and just have IT guys operating the systems. I can't say for sure that they would have an advantage over a small speculator like me, because I have no data to back it up, but removing all of them LIKELY couldn't hurt me in any way.

 

They had a reporter on CNBC trying to justify their staying there, as they were blaming John Thain or someone (one of the execs) for killing them. Their claim is that, when the bear raid starts, it would be that much worse if they weren't there. To me it sounds like a poor attempt to justify themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.