my bad....you are correct. i see the links for the photo's are still there but no photo's when you click. i have no idea why, i guess they are updating the site?????
I have no idea what type of leverage will be allowed/given. The benefit for professional firms will be arbitrage being able to short the stocks without upticks using bullets to help bring prices in line. Not sure how much they will get out of line. I also have no idea how much liquidity they will have. Robert Tharp
I thought I would dive in here for a second. I agree with having additional capital requirements for futures trading. We at Bright have offered futures trading for a long time (we started with our ex-futures floor traders), and found that most traders have not done too well (especially compared to equity trading)from off-floor. We have a higher capital amount requirement as well, and think that with risk involved, that it is justified. (Don't get mad, Futures guys)...but...since there is no real "edge" that we have seen based on performance for several years (remember, we have been CME members for 2 decades) from off the trading floor (again, compared with equities trading)...we don't focus on the trading of emini's. A few of us (myself included) trade the minis every so often, but very few are making any money at it. Perhaps this would be another good "Strategy Test" ???
As we all know, Globex ain't the pit. Its hard to teach an old trader new tricks. Thats especially true if they've had a degree of success using methods contrary to those needed in a new trading environment or with a different trading vehicle. I was less than successful with intraday stock trading but have been doing rather well trading the Nasdaq e-mini. I am less successfull trading the S&P e-mini which I started with (but still profitable). I am a discretionary trader, never hold overnight, trade frequently, always use stops (tighter than most), and sometimes reverse at my stop point (all in one order). Its been working great. I do not have a 15-20 year history I can brag about but my point is that a good stock trader is not necessarily a good futures trader and vice versa.
I agree that often times stock traders and futures traders are two different breeds...even though many of the same principles apply, the tactics vary greatly. Glad to see you're doing well, good luck!!
Has anyone at these prop firms tried to 'pair trade' the Nasdaq e minis against the QQQ. I was looking at the chart overlays and there is a very good correlation (maybe too good for opportunties?) . Seems like a good 'niche' but need to find a prop firm that will allow trader to do method. Anyone doing this reasonably well? Thanks
Used to be done all the time. There were firms making $500,000 a month doing arb on that one. It's gotten very tight and I heard it mainly is making about $500 a month now as too many players have found it. Robert
I did a lot of research on the NQ/QQQ and ES/SPY spreads. Like Tharp said, its very tight, and when it got out of line it reverted quickly. There was a big execution risk on the ETFs. I was looking at it back when the island volume began to pick up, thinking that having electronic execution on both sides would make it easier (It would have been nearly impossible with the AMEX specialists). You have to have very low costs (I used IB) and be really quick, along with good execution skills. Basically, its very difficult because you are playing with the big boys and they have been doing it (arbing the futures and cash in some form or another) for a long time. This is an area where I've wondered if being able to have a computer do your execution would give you enough "edge" to make it work, but I suppose there is always someone with a bigger, faster computer. Kirk
I would think that by now there must be firms out there running automated systems, set to take advantage of any arb opportunities in the futures vs the QQQ, and may explain why they track so closely now? Could a human pressing keys really compete in this area?