19 July 2018
Gary Wright

Gary Wright

Gary Wright - BISS Research

277Posts 1,080,413Views 369Comments
A post relating to this item from Finextra:

FSA not interested in trawling through algo code

12 April 2011  |  8859 views  |  1
The UK's Financial Services Authority has no intention of "looking through lines of code" before signing off algorithms used by high-frequency traders, describing the prospect, floated by the European...

Regulators dereliction of duty

13 April 2011  |  4302 views  |  3

Now it's just dandy that the FSA does not see a role in regulating Algo trading! Surely this is a dereliction of duty of the first order! The financial services industry is highly technical relying on new developments and innovation to produce increased revenue. The business of Algo trading is a fundamental factor in today's securities markets and the codes used a determining feature. How then can the FSA say they do not intend going over reams of code?

Surely the modern market is based on codes and the ability of financial services firms to service the investor? How can the FSA stand back and not take an interest? This is not serving the investor or the markets and calls into question why is the FSA there?

European laws are being created where Algo trading and the like will have to be regulated at code level and the FSA will be at odds with Europe if it rebels. Are we seeing the first death rolls of the FSA leading to a central European Regulator that actually will do its job?

Comments: (6)

Chris Errington
Chris Errington - None - London 13 April, 2011, 15:32

It does worry me that a trader can start up a sell algorithm, to say hedge a holding, and then assume the algo technology will identify when it is moving into dangerous (whole of market moving) territory and stop.  The absence of inherent safety parameters (like say checking on the % change in price over time as a check) may lead to a market moving significantly for an artificial reason.

I guess the FSA should be on the case.  I'd like to think the requirements around allowing a human access to a live exchange would apply equally to technology - you just have to know when to stop sometimes and unless you tell it, the technology won't.

Ploughing through that code is going to be a tough one though and I doubt they will ever find the wood for the trees.  Suspending that part of the market when trading looks really odd (through technology I guess) is probably the best you can hope for.

Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 thumb ups!
A Finextra member
A Finextra member 13 April, 2011, 16:20

Yes it's difficult but not impossible. Surely they can use technology to produce an audit check of the code. The Regulator needs to set parameters that they can check code against and use an AI type system that updates the audit parameters as and when new code is introduced.

It's too important for the FSA to stand back and allow a free for all. Hedge Funds can be set up and closed very quickly and already there is enough experience to show that there are some very sharp people out there that will prey on the FSA's lack of capability.

Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 thumb ups!
Ketharaman Swaminathan
Ketharaman Swaminathan - GTM360 Marketing Solutions - Pune 14 April, 2011, 16:49

Frankly, the very notion that regulators with their shoestring budget can do a meaningful code review of algo trading software that's the outcome of tens, if not hundreds, of million dollars in investment by investment banking firms, sounds a bit strange to me.    

Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 thumb ups!
A Finextra member
A Finextra member 14 April, 2011, 17:09

Sounds like you think that if the regulator is short of cash they give everyone a free for all. Since when does good and sound regulation depend on the size of budget? Its a very strange notion i think

The Regulator must move with the times and if that entails learning new skills and being able to find methods to regulate Algo trading via code then thats what they must do. Otherwise why have regulation if its meaningless?

Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 thumb ups!
Chris Errington
Chris Errington - None - London 28 April, 2011, 12:07

The recent Amazon algorithm issue caught my eye - with a widely reported sell price escalated to $23million.  CNN for one reporting: "Amazon seller lists book at $23,698,655.93 -- plus shipping"

That's what can happen to markets when machines takes over.  Of course valuing a book is easier for humans than equities - you have a rough idea of worth so you don't actually buy at those prices.  But its harder with things that you don't necessarily yet understand, such as equities and even tulips, so the market becomes real (or a false real, if there is such a thing) and people do buy. 


Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 thumb ups!
A Finextra member
A Finextra member 28 April, 2011, 15:29

Thanks Chris

What is needed is some AI to be developed. AI is comming and maybe this will eventually prove the answer , otherwise human grey matter looks like being arround for some time

Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 thumb ups!
Comment on this story (membership required)

Latest posts from Gary

Wealth Management - Turkeys Vote for Christmas

27 September 2013  |  3896 views  |  0 comments | recomends Recommends 0

The future of systems in financial services

29 July 2013  |  3631 views  |  0 comments | recomends Recommends 0

Social media and trust in financial markets

25 June 2013  |  6206 views  |  0 comments | recomends Recommends 0

Technology changing the markets

25 June 2013  |  3480 views  |  0 comments | recomends Recommends 0

Technology begins to change

14 June 2013  |  3010 views  |  0 comments | recomends Recommends 0

Gary's profile

job title Analyst
location London
member since 2007
Summary profile See full profile »
CEO of B.I.S.S. Research, founder of the BISS Independent Accreditation for all systems and services provided to financial services companies internationally. Guest Lecturer at Reading University and...

Gary's expertise

Member since 2007
277 posts369 comments

Who's commenting on Gary's posts