NMS

Fine-Drummer2604

SEC Roundtable on Rule 611 of Regulation NMS The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has scheduled a roundtable discussion focusing on Rule 611 of Regulation NMS at the University of Texas at Austin. Rule 611, also known as the Order Protection Rule, requires brokers to establish and enforce policies to ensure they are achieving the best possible execution for their clients' trades. The roundtable is likely to gather industry experts, academics, and regulators to discuss potential updates or modifications to Rule 611, which plays a crucial role in promoting fair and efficient trading practices in the U.S. equity markets. Such events provide a platform for stakeholders to exchange views and contribute to the SEC's rulemaking process, ensuring that regulations remain effective and responsive to market developments. https://www.whitehousefeed.com

Moist_Tooth_6880

Rules 600(b)(89)(i)(F) and 612 of Regulation NMS implementing the amended minimum pricing increment: Until the first business day of November 2026. * [https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025-130-sec-issues-exemptive-order-regarding-compliance-certain-rules-under-regulation-nms](https://www.sec.gov/newsroom/press-releases/2025-130-sec-issues-exemptive-order-regarding-compliance-certain-rules-under-regulation-nms)

Different-Cricket322

Cancelled orders, based on size/frequency are scrutinized by all brokers for their intent to spoof or quote stuff, so no need to shop for new broker. Quote stuffing and spoofing are both considered "illegal" high-frequency trading strategies used to manipulate markets by creating a false impression of supply and demand. Don't worry though, if you're able to adapt & exploit any inefficiencies elsewhere, you'll be flagged internally by your broker as "toxic" order flow, which will trigger internal speed bumps intended to hamper you execution edge(s), also known as, down throttle of your quote speeds, wider spreads, inability to get filled at mid and/or unfavorable exchange routing. Order flow that exploits inefficiencies and is consistently profitable, in market microstructure = order flow “toxicity” or "selection risk" whereby, a trader consistently trades favorably, and against the liquidity provider. "Toxic” trade examples: *You react to stale quotes faster than the market maker can adjust, consistently buying right before a price ticks up or selling before it ticks down. *Short-term momentum scalping, repeatedly hitting bids/offers seconds before the market moves. *Rapid order placements/cancellations to probe liquidity (quote stuffing). Market makers lose money, getting beat by this intelligent flow. As such, they flag it as liquidity impairment to themselves. Simply put, if you beat them on execution with any consistency, your flow is unwelcomed. How brokers determine “toxic” trading: Brokers and wholesalers like Citadel, Virtu, and Two Sigma analyze order your performance flow metrics. For example, you buy at $1.00 nd 3 seconds later the market is $1.20 and you sell, and do so frequently, your trade flow will catch a "toxic" flow flag (internally). Other flag metrics: *Fill-to-cancel ratio *Holding time *Profitability versus latency (how long between fill & exit). *Direction predictability – if you're repeatedly hitting bids/offers , seconds before the market moves against you. If your order flow is classified as toxic, the broker or liquidity partner might throttle or degrade your execution to "protect" themselves. Throttling means/methods: *Execution delay, adding a small delay before routing your order, negating latency advantage. *Quote shading, you receive slightly worse price quotes than “clean” flow. *Order rerouting, your orders are sent to slower or less favorable exchanges. *Reduced internalization, the broker stops filling you internally and sends you to the exchange, where you face the full spread. *Trade rejection or limits on frequency, size, or number of orders per second. Essentially, your access to the “best execution path” is curtailed to protect the broker’s liquidity relationships. But what about "best execution" obligations that are owed me by my broker? (Best part.) Under Regulation NMS (Rule 5310) and FINRA Best Execution Rule, your broker is required to seek the most favorable terms available to you under reasonable circumstances, but that doesn’t mean you’re entitled to the same routing or internalization treatment as every other trader. ~The rule is “reasonable diligence”, not a guarantee of top-tier internalization. ~Brokers can route differently if your order flow statistically performs worse for liquidity providers. Your broker can legally justify throttling while staying compliant by simply telling you that your order flow is problematic to liquidity provider, and therefore the controls they're subjecting you to are necessary.

Unlucky_Muffin_2927

The dip and large after-hours buy aren't signs of a "YOLO wrong button" mistake or a glitch. This looks like standard execution of a large block trade, likely handled by a broker for an institutional client (e.g., a fund). Retail traders often misinterpret these as errors because they're not visible in real-time like small orders. In reality, big trades are "worked" discreetly to minimize market impact. # How Large Trades Are Executed To buy or sell a massive position like 1.5 million shares of TD (Toronto-Dominion Bank), you don't just hit "buy" on a platform—that would spike the price and alert algorithms. Instead: * Contact an execution broker (e.g., from major banks like Goldman Sachs or boutiques like ITG). * The broker "works" the order throughout the day, aiming to be 10-20% of the stock's Average Daily Volume (ADV) to avoid detection by high-frequency trading algos. * They might guarantee the first 20% upfront, then fill the rest gradually via algorithms (e.g., VWAP—Volume-Weighted Average Price—to match the day's average). This explains the initial dip: It could be part of selling into the market to fill a buy order without crashing liquidity. # Agency vs. Principal Filling Brokers fill orders in two main ways: * **Agency**: The broker acts as an intermediary, finding buyers/sellers without taking ownership. They earn a commission but bear no price risk. Ideal for custom executions. * **Principal**: The broker trades from their own inventory, committing to a price upfront. They take market risk but can offer immediacy. (This is like a dealer buying a car to resell vs. just brokering the sale.) In this case, it seems like an agency setup, where the broker worked the order and crossed it (matched buy/sell internally) or routed it. # End-of-Day Tape Printing The 1.4M share buy at 16:00:02 (just after NYSE close) is likely the broker "printing" the full trade to the consolidated tape after accumulating shares all day. U.S. rules (under SEC Regulation NMS and FINRA Rule 6380B) require all trades to be reported promptly to the tape for transparency—usually within 10 seconds, but block trades or off-exchange fills can be reported later. If unreported on time, they're marked "late." This print "sends it back" to the client, closing the broker's book. The price ($79.63) might seem off because it's an average from intraday fills, not the closing price. No law mandates exact end-of-day prints, but reporting ensures public visibility (see SEC's Consolidated Tape Association Plan). # Why Use These Services? Soft Dollars and Liquidity For less liquid stocks like TD (compared to mega-caps), brokers are essential to avoid slippage. Clients often choose brokers via "soft dollar" arrangements (under SEC Section 28(e)): Part of the commission pays for research, data, or services—instead of hard cash. This is legal if it benefits the client (e.g., better analysis), but abuses like funding "concert tickets" are prohibited and could violate fiduciary duties. It's a way institutions bundle trading with value-adds.

Ok-Outcome2266

https://preview.redd.it/baww7r1b7sqf1.png?width=1190&format=png&auto=webp&s=c6d2f025eb450d234f72d05d91401944a31c2efa why (maybe?)? reason: https://otctransparency. finra. org/otctransparency/AtsDownload > ✅ NMS Tier 2 Statistical evidence that memes are getting a lot of attention

lolzicals

The author of the tweet is the NMS dev

North-bound

Reg NMS

PeterBucci

Just to piggyback off the top comment with important info, Schwab allows fractional shares for S&P500 stocks only, while Robinhood allows it "for National Market System (NMS) securities listed on national issues exchanges like the Nasdaq and NYSE, and not for stocks traded [over the counter (OTC)](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/investing-basics/glossary/over-counter-otc-securities)".

PeterBucci

>You can buy partial/fractional stocks. Schwab allows fractional shares for S&P500 stocks only, while Robinhood allows it "for National Market System (NMS) securities listed on national issues exchanges like the Nasdaq and NYSE, and not for stocks traded [over the counter (OTC)](https://www.investor.gov/introduction-investing/investing-basics/glossary/over-counter-otc-securities)".

msaleem

This is what Fidelity offers:  > With fractional shares or dollar-based orders, you can trade National Market System (NMS) exchange-listed stocks. This includes stocks listed on the NYSE or Nasdaq.

_le_slap

> National Best Bid and Offer[1] (NBBO) is a regulation by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission that requires brokers to execute customer trades at the best available (lowest) ask price when buying securities, and the best available (highest) bid price when selling securities, as governed by Regulation NMS. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_best_bid_and_offer

Mathfanforpresident

I'm posting this so you can hopefully see that the entire stock market is a fucking scam While **technically**, most trades are *supposed* to be reported to the **Trade Reporting Facility (TRF)**, the reality is far messier due to **delays, loopholes, and outright manipulation**. Here’s how the system really works (and how it fails): --- ### **1. The Myth of "All Trades Are Reported"** #### **What the Rules Say:** - **Regulation NMS (National Market System)** requires trades to be reported. - **FINRA’s TRF (Trade Reporting Facility)** is where **off-exchange** (dark pool, internalized) trades are logged. - **SEC Rule 605/606** demands brokers disclose execution quality, including where trades are routed. #### **The Reality:** - **Delayed Reporting:** While trades *eventually* show up in TRF data, **real-time transparency is missing**, meaning prices don’t reflect true supply/demand in the moment. - **Hidden Liquidity:** Dark pools (like Citadel’s, Morgan Stanley’s, etc.) don’t publish order books, so you can’t see buy/sell pressure building. - **Internalization:** Market makers (e.g., Citadel, Virtu) match retail orders internally *without* sending them to exchanges, then report them later. --- ### **2. How GameStop Exposed the Lies** #### **A. The "Missing" Short Interest** - **FINRA’s short interest data** was **way behind** actual shorting during the GME squeeze. - **Swaps & Hidden Shorts:** Hedge funds used **total return swaps** (via banks like Morgan Stanley) to hide short exposure. These **don’t show up in short interest reports**. - Example: Melvin Capital’s reported short interest was **only part of their actual bet**, the rest was buried in swaps. #### **B. Dark Pool Abuse** - **Over 50% of GME volume** was routed through dark pools at the peak (Jan 2021). - **Price Suppression:** By keeping buys in dark pools and selling on lit exchanges, hedge funds and market makers **prevented price discovery**. - Robinhood’s order flow was sold to Citadel, which internalized trades instead of letting them hit the market. #### **C. Failure-to-Deliver (FTD) Tricks** - **Naked shorting** led to phantom shares flooding the market. - FTDs were **hidden via options market maker exemptions** (e.g., deep ITM calls used to reset FTD cycles). --- ### **3. The Biggest Loopholes That Break the System** #### **A. Swaps & Derivatives Don’t Get Reported Like Stocks** - A hedge fund can **control millions of shares via swaps** (synthetic positions) without it showing up in SEC filings. - **Example:** Archegos’ 2021 collapse revealed **$100B+ in hidden leverage** via swaps, none of it was in 13F reports. #### **B. "Bona Fide Market Making" Exemption** - Market makers (like Citadel Securities) can **legally naked short** under the guise of "providing liquidity." - This lets them **flood the market with fake shares** without immediate consequences. #### **C. TRF Data Is Slow & Opaque** - **Trades are reported, but too late to matter.** By the time TRF data is public, hedge funds have already adjusted their strategies. - **Lit exchanges (NYSE, Nasdaq) see only a fraction of real-time volume**, making price action misleading. --- ### **4. Proof the System Is Rigged** #### **A. SEC’s Own 2021 Report on GameStop** - Admitted that **"gamification" (Robinhood) and PFOF distorted markets**. - **Did nothing** to fix dark pool abuse or swap loopholes. #### **B. Bloomberg’s Findings on Dark Pools** - In 2021, **dark pools handled ~45% of all stock trades**, far higher than regulators claim is "healthy." - Retail buys were **steered into dark pools**, while sells hit lit exchanges (suppressing prices). #### **C. Academic Studies** - Research shows **dark pools worsen price discovery** (e.g., "Dark Trading and Price Discovery", 2017, Journal of Finance). - **FTDs are systematically underreported** (SEC’s own data shows "threshold securities" with chronic FTDs). --- ### **5. What They Don’t Want You to Know** - **The TRF is a smokescreen.** Yes, trades are *eventually* reported, but the **delay lets insiders front-run and manipulate**. - **Swaps, options, and ETFs are used to hide short positions** (e.g., "married puts" to mask FTDs). - **Retail is at a structural disadvantage**, HFTs and dark pools see order flow before you do. --- ### **Conclusion: The System Is Designed for Opacity** The claim that "all trades are reported" is **technically true in the narrowest sense**, but in practice: - **Dark pools hide real-time liquidity.** - **Swaps hide true short interest.** - **FTDs hide naked shorting.** - **Internalization hides price impact.** GameStop proved that **price discovery is broken**, and until the SEC cracks down on: - **Dark pool abuse** - **Swap reporting** - **Naked shorting loopholes** …the market will remain **rigged in favor of Wall Street insiders**. **Want Proof?** Check: - FINRA’s **TRF volume vs. lit exchanges** (always a huge gap). - SEC’s **FTD data** (GME still has millions of fails). - Swaps disclosures (**lack thereof**) in 13F filings. FULL DISCLOSURE: i used AI to help me with this.

Mathfanforpresident

While **technically**, most trades are *supposed* to be reported to the **Trade Reporting Facility (TRF)**, the reality is far messier due to **delays, loopholes, and outright manipulation**. Here’s how the system really works (and how it fails): --- ### **1. The Myth of "All Trades Are Reported"** #### **What the Rules Say:** - **Regulation NMS (National Market System)** requires trades to be reported. - **FINRA’s TRF (Trade Reporting Facility)** is where **off-exchange** (dark pool, internalized) trades are logged. - **SEC Rule 605/606** demands brokers disclose execution quality, including where trades are routed. #### **The Reality:** - **Delayed Reporting:** While trades *eventually* show up in TRF data, **real-time transparency is missing**, meaning prices don’t reflect true supply/demand in the moment. - **Hidden Liquidity:** Dark pools (like Citadel’s, Morgan Stanley’s, etc.) don’t publish order books, so you can’t see buy/sell pressure building. - **Internalization:** Market makers (e.g., Citadel, Virtu) match retail orders internally *without* sending them to exchanges, then report them later. --- ### **2. How GameStop Exposed the Lies** #### **A. The "Missing" Short Interest** - **FINRA’s short interest data** was **way behind** actual shorting during the GME squeeze. - **Swaps & Hidden Shorts:** Hedge funds used **total return swaps** (via banks like Morgan Stanley) to hide short exposure. These **don’t show up in short interest reports**. - Example: Melvin Capital’s reported short interest was **only part of their actual bet**, the rest was buried in swaps. #### **B. Dark Pool Abuse** - **Over 50% of GME volume** was routed through dark pools at the peak (Jan 2021). - **Price Suppression:** By keeping buys in dark pools and selling on lit exchanges, hedge funds and market makers **prevented price discovery**. - Robinhood’s order flow was sold to Citadel, which internalized trades instead of letting them hit the market. #### **C. Failure-to-Deliver (FTD) Tricks** - **Naked shorting** led to phantom shares flooding the market. - FTDs were **hidden via options market maker exemptions** (e.g., deep ITM calls used to reset FTD cycles). --- ### **3. The Biggest Loopholes That Break the System** #### **A. Swaps & Derivatives Don’t Get Reported Like Stocks** - A hedge fund can **control millions of shares via swaps** (synthetic positions) without it showing up in SEC filings. - **Example:** Archegos’ 2021 collapse revealed **$100B+ in hidden leverage** via swaps, none of it was in 13F reports. #### **B. "Bona Fide Market Making" Exemption** - Market makers (like Citadel Securities) can **legally naked short** under the guise of "providing liquidity." - This lets them **flood the market with fake shares** without immediate consequences. #### **C. TRF Data Is Slow & Opaque** - **Trades are reported, but too late to matter.** By the time TRF data is public, hedge funds have already adjusted their strategies. - **Lit exchanges (NYSE, Nasdaq) see only a fraction of real-time volume**, making price action misleading. --- ### **4. Proof the System Is Rigged** #### **A. SEC’s Own 2021 Report on GameStop** - Admitted that **"gamification" (Robinhood) and PFOF distorted markets**. - **Did nothing** to fix dark pool abuse or swap loopholes. #### **B. Bloomberg’s Findings on Dark Pools** - In 2021, **dark pools handled ~45% of all stock trades**, far higher than regulators claim is "healthy." - Retail buys were **steered into dark pools**, while sells hit lit exchanges (suppressing prices). #### **C. Academic Studies** - Research shows **dark pools worsen price discovery** (e.g., "Dark Trading and Price Discovery", 2017, Journal of Finance). - **FTDs are systematically underreported** (SEC’s own data shows "threshold securities" with chronic FTDs). --- ### **5. What They Don’t Want You to Know** - **The TRF is a smokescreen.** Yes, trades are *eventually* reported, but the **delay lets insiders front-run and manipulate**. - **Swaps, options, and ETFs are used to hide short positions** (e.g., "married puts" to mask FTDs). - **Retail is at a structural disadvantage**, HFTs and dark pools see order flow before you do. --- ### **Conclusion: The System Is Designed for Opacity** The claim that "all trades are reported" is **technically true in the narrowest sense**, but in practice: - **Dark pools hide real-time liquidity.** - **Swaps hide true short interest.** - **FTDs hide naked shorting.** - **Internalization hides price impact.** GameStop proved that **price discovery is broken**, and until the SEC cracks down on: - **Dark pool abuse** - **Swap reporting** - **Naked shorting loopholes** …the market will remain **rigged in favor of Wall Street insiders**. **Want Proof?** Check: - FINRA’s **TRF volume vs. lit exchanges** (always a huge gap). - SEC’s **FTD data** (GME still has millions of fails). - Swaps disclosures (**lack thereof**) in 13F filings. FULL DISCLOSURE: i used AI to help me with this.

Mathfanforpresident

I'm posting this so you can hopefully see that the entire stock market is a fucking scam While **technically**, most trades are *supposed* to be reported to the **Trade Reporting Facility (TRF)**, the reality is far messier due to **delays, loopholes, and outright manipulation**. Here’s how the system really works (and how it fails): --- ### **1. The Myth of "All Trades Are Reported"** #### **What the Rules Say:** - **Regulation NMS (National Market System)** requires trades to be reported. - **FINRA’s TRF (Trade Reporting Facility)** is where **off-exchange** (dark pool, internalized) trades are logged. - **SEC Rule 605/606** demands brokers disclose execution quality, including where trades are routed. #### **The Reality:** - **Delayed Reporting:** While trades *eventually* show up in TRF data, **real-time transparency is missing**, meaning prices don’t reflect true supply/demand in the moment. - **Hidden Liquidity:** Dark pools (like Citadel’s, Morgan Stanley’s, etc.) don’t publish order books, so you can’t see buy/sell pressure building. - **Internalization:** Market makers (e.g., Citadel, Virtu) match retail orders internally *without* sending them to exchanges, then report them later. --- ### **2. How GameStop Exposed the Lies** #### **A. The "Missing" Short Interest** - **FINRA’s short interest data** was **way behind** actual shorting during the GME squeeze. - **Swaps & Hidden Shorts:** Hedge funds used **total return swaps** (via banks like Morgan Stanley) to hide short exposure. These **don’t show up in short interest reports**. - Example: Melvin Capital’s reported short interest was **only part of their actual bet**, the rest was buried in swaps. #### **B. Dark Pool Abuse** - **Over 50% of GME volume** was routed through dark pools at the peak (Jan 2021). - **Price Suppression:** By keeping buys in dark pools and selling on lit exchanges, hedge funds and market makers **prevented price discovery**. - Robinhood’s order flow was sold to Citadel, which internalized trades instead of letting them hit the market. #### **C. Failure-to-Deliver (FTD) Tricks** - **Naked shorting** led to phantom shares flooding the market. - FTDs were **hidden via options market maker exemptions** (e.g., deep ITM calls used to reset FTD cycles). --- ### **3. The Biggest Loopholes That Break the System** #### **A. Swaps & Derivatives Don’t Get Reported Like Stocks** - A hedge fund can **control millions of shares via swaps** (synthetic positions) without it showing up in SEC filings. - **Example:** Archegos’ 2021 collapse revealed **$100B+ in hidden leverage** via swaps, none of it was in 13F reports. #### **B. "Bona Fide Market Making" Exemption** - Market makers (like Citadel Securities) can **legally naked short** under the guise of "providing liquidity." - This lets them **flood the market with fake shares** without immediate consequences. #### **C. TRF Data Is Slow & Opaque** - **Trades are reported, but too late to matter.** By the time TRF data is public, hedge funds have already adjusted their strategies. - **Lit exchanges (NYSE, Nasdaq) see only a fraction of real-time volume**, making price action misleading. --- ### **4. Proof the System Is Rigged** #### **A. SEC’s Own 2021 Report on GameStop** - Admitted that **"gamification" (Robinhood) and PFOF distorted markets**. - **Did nothing** to fix dark pool abuse or swap loopholes. #### **B. Bloomberg’s Findings on Dark Pools** - In 2021, **dark pools handled ~45% of all stock trades**, far higher than regulators claim is "healthy." - Retail buys were **steered into dark pools**, while sells hit lit exchanges (suppressing prices). #### **C. Academic Studies** - Research shows **dark pools worsen price discovery** (e.g., "Dark Trading and Price Discovery", 2017, Journal of Finance). - **FTDs are systematically underreported** (SEC’s own data shows "threshold securities" with chronic FTDs). --- ### **5. What They Don’t Want You to Know** - **The TRF is a smokescreen.** Yes, trades are *eventually* reported, but the **delay lets insiders front-run and manipulate**. - **Swaps, options, and ETFs are used to hide short positions** (e.g., "married puts" to mask FTDs). - **Retail is at a structural disadvantage**, HFTs and dark pools see order flow before you do. --- ### **Conclusion: The System Is Designed for Opacity** The claim that "all trades are reported" is **technically true in the narrowest sense**, but in practice: - **Dark pools hide real-time liquidity.** - **Swaps hide true short interest.** - **FTDs hide naked shorting.** - **Internalization hides price impact.** GameStop proved that **price discovery is broken**, and until the SEC cracks down on: - **Dark pool abuse** - **Swap reporting** - **Naked shorting loopholes** …the market will remain **rigged in favor of Wall Street insiders**. **Want Proof?** Check: - FINRA’s **TRF volume vs. lit exchanges** (always a huge gap). - SEC’s **FTD data** (GME still has millions of fails). - Swaps disclosures (**lack thereof**) in 13F filings. FULL DISCLOSURE: i used AI to help me with this.

Mathfanforpresident

While **technically**, most trades are *supposed* to be reported to the **Trade Reporting Facility (TRF)**, the reality is far messier due to **delays, loopholes, and outright manipulation**. Here’s how the system really works (and how it fails): --- ### **1. The Myth of "All Trades Are Reported"** #### **What the Rules Say:** - **Regulation NMS (National Market System)** requires trades to be reported. - **FINRA’s TRF (Trade Reporting Facility)** is where **off-exchange** (dark pool, internalized) trades are logged. - **SEC Rule 605/606** demands brokers disclose execution quality, including where trades are routed. #### **The Reality:** - **Delayed Reporting:** While trades *eventually* show up in TRF data, **real-time transparency is missing**, meaning prices don’t reflect true supply/demand in the moment. - **Hidden Liquidity:** Dark pools (like Citadel’s, Morgan Stanley’s, etc.) don’t publish order books, so you can’t see buy/sell pressure building. - **Internalization:** Market makers (e.g., Citadel, Virtu) match retail orders internally *without* sending them to exchanges, then report them later. --- ### **2. How GameStop Exposed the Lies** #### **A. The "Missing" Short Interest** - **FINRA’s short interest data** was **way behind** actual shorting during the GME squeeze. - **Swaps & Hidden Shorts:** Hedge funds used **total return swaps** (via banks like Morgan Stanley) to hide short exposure. These **don’t show up in short interest reports**. - Example: Melvin Capital’s reported short interest was **only part of their actual bet**, the rest was buried in swaps. #### **B. Dark Pool Abuse** - **Over 50% of GME volume** was routed through dark pools at the peak (Jan 2021). - **Price Suppression:** By keeping buys in dark pools and selling on lit exchanges, hedge funds and market makers **prevented price discovery**. - Robinhood’s order flow was sold to Citadel, which internalized trades instead of letting them hit the market. #### **C. Failure-to-Deliver (FTD) Tricks** - **Naked shorting** led to phantom shares flooding the market. - FTDs were **hidden via options market maker exemptions** (e.g., deep ITM calls used to reset FTD cycles). --- ### **3. The Biggest Loopholes That Break the System** #### **A. Swaps & Derivatives Don’t Get Reported Like Stocks** - A hedge fund can **control millions of shares via swaps** (synthetic positions) without it showing up in SEC filings. - **Example:** Archegos’ 2021 collapse revealed **$100B+ in hidden leverage** via swaps, none of it was in 13F reports. #### **B. "Bona Fide Market Making" Exemption** - Market makers (like Citadel Securities) can **legally naked short** under the guise of "providing liquidity." - This lets them **flood the market with fake shares** without immediate consequences. #### **C. TRF Data Is Slow & Opaque** - **Trades are reported, but too late to matter.** By the time TRF data is public, hedge funds have already adjusted their strategies. - **Lit exchanges (NYSE, Nasdaq) see only a fraction of real-time volume**, making price action misleading. --- ### **4. Proof the System Is Rigged** #### **A. SEC’s Own 2021 Report on GameStop** - Admitted that **"gamification" (Robinhood) and PFOF distorted markets**. - **Did nothing** to fix dark pool abuse or swap loopholes. #### **B. Bloomberg’s Findings on Dark Pools** - In 2021, **dark pools handled ~45% of all stock trades**, far higher than regulators claim is "healthy." - Retail buys were **steered into dark pools**, while sells hit lit exchanges (suppressing prices). #### **C. Academic Studies** - Research shows **dark pools worsen price discovery** (e.g., "Dark Trading and Price Discovery", 2017, Journal of Finance). - **FTDs are systematically underreported** (SEC’s own data shows "threshold securities" with chronic FTDs). --- ### **5. What They Don’t Want You to Know** - **The TRF is a smokescreen.** Yes, trades are *eventually* reported, but the **delay lets insiders front-run and manipulate**. - **Swaps, options, and ETFs are used to hide short positions** (e.g., "married puts" to mask FTDs). - **Retail is at a structural disadvantage**, HFTs and dark pools see order flow before you do. --- ### **Conclusion: The System Is Designed for Opacity** The claim that "all trades are reported" is **technically true in the narrowest sense**, but in practice: - **Dark pools hide real-time liquidity.** - **Swaps hide true short interest.** - **FTDs hide naked shorting.** - **Internalization hides price impact.** GameStop proved that **price discovery is broken**, and until the SEC cracks down on: - **Dark pool abuse** - **Swap reporting** - **Naked shorting loopholes** …the market will remain **rigged in favor of Wall Street insiders**. **Want Proof?** Check: - FINRA’s **TRF volume vs. lit exchanges** (always a huge gap). - SEC’s **FTD data** (GME still has millions of fails). - Swaps disclosures (**lack thereof**) in 13F filings. FULL DISCLOSURE: i used AI to help me with this.

sudrapp

.03 Market-wide Circuit Breaker in OTC Equity Securities. In the event FINRA has halted trading otherwise than on an exchange in all NMS stocks pursuant to Rule 6121, FINRA also shall halt trading in all OTC Equity Securities until such time that the market-wide circuit breaker no longer is in effect for NMS stocks. [Source](https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/rulebooks/finra-rules/6440-0#:~:text=03%20Market%2Dwide%20Circuit%20Breaker,in%20effect%20for%20NMS%20stocks.) straight from FINRA. You can not trade during a halt, that's the point of the halt.

lostbanbet

BOATS, or Blue Ocean ATS, is an alternative trading system (ATS) that facilitates trading of U.S. National Market System (NMS) stocks during US overnight hours, from 8:00 PM to 4:00 AM ET (Sunday-Thursday), offering an exchange-like experience with electronic order delivery and live data. Pre/after market are barely real, but at least kinda set the trend during the hours where there is volume. Overnight is completely on its own and irrelevant. You almost always get hosed. If you do a market buy/sell you will get an unfavorable fill that can be 3% against you.

greytoc

While I think that it's interesting that exchanges like ICE and Nasdaq want to go 24 hours or close to 24 hours - there is so much infrastructure that still has to be put in place. Especially if there is a desire and requirement to support Reg NMS. I would like to see how Nasdaq and the various ATSs propose to handle Rule 611 and trade through rules. It will be interesting to see how all of this works out.

Meow_Game

“Hi u/FIIKY52, Fidelity does not receive Payment for Order Flow (PFOF) for stock and Exchange Traded Funds (ETF) trades. Under SEC Rule 606, broker-dealers that route equity and option orders on behalf of customers are required to prepare quarterly reports that disclose specific information about their order routing practices for non-directed orders in National Market System (NMS) stocks and option contracts in NMS securities. The reports are made available to the public free of charge for each calendar quarter and published no later than one month after the end of the quarter. Please know that Fidelity works hard to get you the best price. In the event that we route your equity order to Citadel, it is because they are giving the best execution price. We do not take payment for this; instead, we pass along the price improvement to you. If you want more control over where your trades are routed for execution, you can use the Directed Trade feature available in our Active Trader Pro (ATP) platform, which is free to use for all Fidelity clients. We appreciate your feedback regarding adding an exclusion feature to order routing, and I will pass your comments along to the appropriate teams. To access the Directed Trading feature in ATP, go to the menu for “Trade & Orders” then select “Directed Trade & Extended Hours.” Available exchanges will vary based on where the stock/ETF you are trading is listed.” From Fidelity on Reddit. Sit down, zumbass

cobwebscripts

* "...is there always more then one market maker quoting for each strike?" * Theoretically there should be several, but it depends on volume and the exchange. Some exchanges have an appointment system where they divide market makers based on seniority and volume. For options they split based on volume, so multiple options designated as low volume may be grouped to one market maker, but ideally there should still be overlap \[1\]. Also, I believe they work on a option class (option class I believe = all options for a stock) level rather than a strike level. So if there are two market makers working on the same option class, they'll be covering all strikes for that stock's options. * "So do the exchanges prick the "best" price for me from all the market makers?" * Yes. This is from the regulation by the SEC called National best bid and offer (NBBO) \[2, 4\]. I believe exchanges have their data compiled together so that the best price among them is chosen first. * In terms of actually "picking" it for you, this would become more prominent if you make a market order. They have to pick the best price at that moment, which, ironically does not have to be the NBBO (I know that sounds weird, but pretty much market orders say sell/buy this NOW. So they pick the best of what they have without waiting for the NBBO calculation. This slippage is more prevalent during very volatile times.). With the limit order, you are looking at the bid-ask presented by the NBBO and deciding what price to set for yourself (which will in turn be sent and added to the calculation for the NBBO) \[3\]. * "...an average trade would take 2 hours to fill" * Depending on the liquidity of the option you are choosing, it may take a long time to fill. When the spread gets super duper wide, the market maker is telling you "hey no one trades this, so for me to provide any liquidity, I'm gonna have to sit on the opposite trade for a while, so I'm gonna need a bigger cut." It's like going to a pawn shop. If you give them something they can flip really easy, you'll get closer to the full value. If they are going to have to sit on it for a long time, they'll probably give you a worse offer. So in your case going for the mid for a wide order, they are going to make you wait for a while until they are ready to fill that order. You might have to tweak your order away from the mid to entice the market maker to take up your trade faster. Sources: 1. https://www.nyse.com/markets/american-options/market-info#:\~:text=Market%20Makers%20are%20required%20to,Market%20Makers%20in%20each%20class. 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National\_best\_bid\_and\_offer#:\~:text=National%20Best%20Bid%20and%20Offer%20(NBBO)%20is%20a%20regulation%20by,as%20governed%20by%20Regulation%20NMS. 3. https://fastercapital.com/content/NBBO-and-the-Role-of-Limit-Orders-in-Ensuring-Fair-Trade.html#:\~:text=Limit%20orders%20can%20affect%20the,it%20becomes%20the%20new%20NBBO. 4. [https://www.schwab.com/execution-quality/price-improvement](https://www.schwab.com/execution-quality/price-improvement)

RunningOftimeout

Nasdaq Inc. and Cboe Global Markets Inc., two of the biggest stock exchanges, challenged a new US Securities and Exchange Commission rule that changes the economic structure of how stocks trade. The firms asked a court to review the SEC’s recently finalized national market structure regulation, also known as Reg-NMS, according to a petition, which they said was lodged with a United States appeals court in Washington. “The SEC’s recently adopted amendments to certain Reg NMS rules fall short of supporting these principles and will inhibit price discovery, leading us to file a petition for review,” Cboe said in a statement to Bloomberg Thursday. The agency approved a rule last month that lowered fees that exchanges charge brokers to access the best displayed prices on their venue. Those caps help ensure that market participants have fair access to the best displayed prices, the SEC said at the time of the vote. But large exchanges like Nasdaq and Cboe have said lowering the access fee could make it more costly for them to lure some trade orders to their platforms and away from wholesale trading firms like Citadel Securities and Virtu Financial. Nasdaq said that the rule “threatens to worsen outcomes for investors, listed companies, and the US equity markets,” according to a separate statement. A representative for the SEC didn’t immediately return messages seeking comment. Notably, the New York Stock Exchange, the largest exchange, is not a party to the joint Cboe and Nasdaq petition. The SEC rule is among a slew of market-structure overhauls proposed under SEC Chair Gary Gensler’s tenure. The agency approved one measure earlier this year to require brokers to give better disclosure about the execution quality they offer traders which has not been litigated. Two other measures proposed in the four-rule suite in December 2022 are still pending. How does this impact CBOE and NASDAQ but not NYSE. Also what are the other measure proposed, does anyone know?

bossExtremeSwag

You obviously don’t understand. Making money on the bid ask spread is orthogonal to investors getting the best deal. Do another quick google on NBBO (Reg NMS).

greytoc

Hah - what a great question. This is defined as part of Reg NMS - specifically Rule 612. An IOI (indication of interest) and bid/offer must be in an increment of at least $0.01. So trades are whole penny. The exception is for stocks which are priced less than $1.00. In those cases, the minimum increment is $0.0001. But a transaction is done via a lot - so a lot can result in an average price that is sub-penny.

IlllIlIIlIlII

Noob question here, is Nasdaq Inc (Nasdaq.NMS) like S&P500 ETF? that tracks the top tech companies? or it's the exchange company? because the performance is similar to the MAG7 over long term so it seems a better choice that going balls deep spreading your money over the 7 companies and lose money on fees.

No-Monitor-5333

Here is how the halts work The thresholds for halting trading in a specific stock like GameStop Corp. ($GME) are primarily governed by the Limit Up-Limit Down (LULD) mechanism, which is designed to prevent excessive volatility. For $GME, which falls under the category of a Tier 2 NMS stock, the relevant thresholds are as follows: 1. **Price Bands**: - For Tier 2 stocks like $GME, the LULD price bands are typically set at 10% above and below the average price of the stock over the preceding 5-minute period during regular trading hours. 2. **Trading Pauses**: - If $GME's price moves outside these established price bands, a 5-minute trading pause is triggered. This allows the market to absorb information and return to orderly trading. 3. **Extended Hours**: - During the opening (9:30 AM to 9:45 AM ET) and closing (3:35 PM to 4:00 PM ET) periods, the price bands are doubled (20% above and below the average price) to accommodate higher volatility during these times. 4. **Additional Factors**: - Besides the LULD mechanism, trading halts can also be initiated due to pending news, regulatory concerns, or significant order imbalances, as with any other stock. These thresholds ensure that trading pauses occur in a controlled manner to prevent excessive short-term volatility and to protect investors from erratic market behavior.

LectureModeOff

If it becomes a national exchange you will have to trade on it because of reg NMS.

brun56

Someone has to place a sell order at market or a marketable limit order (priced at 24.03 or lower) for either Alice or Bob’s order to execute. If Alice and Bob’s orders were sent to the same exchange, Alice’s would execute before Bob’s. If Alice and Bob’s orders were sent to different exchanges it’s up to the firm handling the sell order to decide which exchange the sell order goes to or how to divide the sell order between the two exchanges. Reg NMS specifies that Alice and Bob’s orders need to be executed before any order priced below 24.03 can be executed. The firm handling the sell order may choose to fill the sell order itself at 24.03 or a higher price (providing price improvement to the sell order and no fill to Alice or Bob), but a market maker can not skip ahead of Bob or Alice on the exchange’s order book.

greytoc

It's a bit more nuanced in extended hours and overnight trading. Unless Reg NMS has been amended, there is no NBBO requirement in extended hours trading because markets can be unlinked after the regular trading session. And with overnight trading for equities - which is normally between 8pm ET to 4:00am - the rules on trade reporting changes because those systems become unavailable (maintenance, etc.). I don't recall the details because it's evolving but there is some time period during the overnight session where trade reporting is not required or available.

Skilledthunder

Learn what the fuck you're talking about. Straight from the SEC rules... "If the stock’s price moves to the price band and does not move back within the price bands within 15 seconds, trading in the stock will pause for five minutes. These price bands are 5%, 10%, 20%, or the lesser of $.15 or 75%, depending on the price of the stock and whether the stock is designated as a Tier 1 or Tier 2 NMS stock"

greytoc

just to clarify my original comment. When you see a bid and ask - that is the current best quote available. It's called the NBBO or national best bid offer. There are legal requirements for how orders are executed. These rules are promulgated in Regulation NMS. An order is not permitted to be executed outside the best bid/ask. (there are some rare exceptions, but it generally doesn't pertain to retail investors). When you see the bid/ask - that means that any open orders will cross (ie execute/fill) inside the spread. However - that said - if a stock doesn't have a lot of liquidity - ie not many people want to buy or sell shares, the spread could be wider. And if there have not been any recent executions - it's possible for the spread to move based on current conditions. So the last price which is the last execution before the bid/ask spread moves - could be higher or lower than the spread. The bid, ask, and last are all separate elements. But the last may have occurred before the bid/ask moves. Does that make more sense?

starbolin

The exchanges are Self Regulated Organizations, SROs. There are a few Regulations, The 1934 act. The 1975 NMS act. There are very few laws. There have been some subtle regulation changes that -may- prevent another event similar to GME. ( I only know if one change to the DCC that really has any significant effect, and it went by largely un-noticed. ) But someone will eventually find a way to break the markets again.

MrZwink

Nyq is for consolidated instruments NYS is for normal NYSE notation NMS is for national market system. They're technically different exchanges (platforms)

DutchAC

On Yahoo Finance when you look up a stock ticker thar trades on the NYSE, it says Equity followed by NYQ. For a NASDAQ stock it says NMS. What is NYQ and NMS and what do they stand for?

greytoc

There is not a markup. If you put in a market order, it's executed at worst on the bid or ask. Some brokers will price improve orders if they are able to do so. I believe that Robinhood rarely is able to price improve a fill based on their business model. Regarding exchange fees - many brokers pass exchange and regulatory fees to their clients. A broker can also charge fees and commissions which is different than a dealer mark-up. Or the broker can receive exchange rebates or sell the order flow to market makers. And yes - this is known - it's defined by Regulation NMS. You can also look through a broker's rule 606/607 disclosure filings which all brokers publish. Not sure where you got this idea or a trade mark-up but you may want to stop believing random social media comments. It's a bit more nuanced than saying it's a mark-up. Reg NMS - [https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/final/34-51808.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/files/rules/final/34-51808.pdf) Reg NMS rulemaking - [https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/nms](https://www.sec.gov/rules/sro/nms) FINRA guidance to members - [https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/guidance/national-market-system-plans](https://www.finra.org/rules-guidance/guidance/national-market-system-plans) Robinhood's latest (Q3 2023) 606/607 disclosures - [https://cdn.robinhood.com/assets/robinhood/legal/RHF%20SEC%20Rule%20606%20and%20607%20Disclosure.pdf](https://cdn.robinhood.com/assets/robinhood/legal/RHF%20SEC%20Rule%20606%20and%20607%20Disclosure.pdf) Robinhood's disclosure library - [https://robinhood.com/us/en/about/legal/](https://robinhood.com/us/en/about/legal/) For comparison - Fidelity - [https://capitalmarkets.fidelity.com/trade-execution-quality/sec-rule-606](https://capitalmarkets.fidelity.com/trade-execution-quality/sec-rule-606) Fidelity - [https://capitalmarkets.fidelity.com/trade-execution-quality](https://capitalmarkets.fidelity.com/trade-execution-quality) Schwb - [https://www.schwab.com/legal/order-routing-1](https://www.schwab.com/legal/order-routing-1) E-Trade - [https://us.etrade.com/l/quarterly-order-routing-report](https://us.etrade.com/l/quarterly-order-routing-report)

greytoc

>So the 1st people that bought the stock on opening day, who sold to them? Prior to a stock trading on the secondary market. These people are either early investors in the company or people that acquired shares from the underwriting syndicate. The underwriting syndicate underwites the entire IPO from the company that is seeking to raise capital. ​ >Does that mean the stock will jump from $30 to $100 back to $30, or stays at $100? No - there is a spread between the best bid and best ask. The best bid is the best price that someone is willing to buy at. The best ask is the best price that someone is willing to sell at. When there is a cross - that's when a trade occurs. The NBBO (national best bid and offer) has rules as part of Regulation NMS so that the best bid/ask is adhered to.

desensitized-viewer

To the extent that you "trade" listed options, my guess is it's because you charge them 5c a contract, and you make money on the commissions functionally skirting Reg NMS as well, not the trading. Your bank could be different, but BAML/GS/MS/JPM all do this. IDK about the standard at European banks.

desensitized-viewer

Nothing he does effects traders like you directly. A bank trader has a remarkably boring life. For the most part, they do not trade the same equity and index options you or I do. If a client needs a market made in something liquid like SPY options, they have to farm out liquidity to places like Citadel and Susquehanna, who actually know what they're doing, Instead banks invent product that look and behave similarly to listed options, but are more enticing or bespoke to their clients' needs. One example being a swaption instead of an option, or a knock-in option. Their quants then map exactly what the bank needs to do in order to replicate the performance profile of these instruments with listed options in order to lay off the risk. What this allows them to do is skirt Reg NMS, which guarantees customers cannot get filled outside of the national market. Why? Because there is no national market--the bank just made up something totally different. So, the quants take all the prices of the lit options markets, and use them to calibrate a model that tells them what the special instrument is now worth. they might find, for example, the swaption is the exact same thing as selling a tresury future and buying an SPX 4000 Put. If the market on each one of those is 1bp and 20 cents, they will quote their client 20bps and 2.00 wide. None of this affects you directly. If you own stock in a company that engages in these sorts of transactions with the bank, then they obviously steal a lot of money from the company you own, but nothing the banks do here effects the trading in the lit exchanges.

eyE9CEyu

All trades executed between 8:00 am and 8:00 pm EST must be reported within 10 seconds of being executed. This is the rule regardless of whether or not it’s in a dark pool. Regulators will still see the trades in the report the day after. Retail does not see these reports. Read Flash Boys if you want to know how HFT exploits loopholes in Reg NMS to stay technically legal.

Consistent-Reach-152

Corporate action for ICCT was August 25. The SEC filing was with a date of August 29 with an actual filing time of post market on August 28. It is hard for brokers to predict the future. If the stock was in NMS or NYSE the company would have had to give 10 days notice before the corporate action. In this OTC stock they announced after the fact.

greytoc

>could you place a ridiculous limit order that is in force until filled? Something like BRKA for 1 dollar and see if someone makes a typo? It depends on the broker. Many brokers will have logic to prevent an investor from placing a limit order too far away from the spread because it's assumed to be an error. For example - Fidelity would generate an error. Also just to elaborate on your accidental typo hypothesis - that fill cannot happen on US exchanges because of the Order Protection Rule that is part of Regulation NMS. The rule does not permit "trading through" a protected quote for any NMS security such as BRK.A. You can find the details of the Order Protection Rule - 17 CFR § 242.611 here - [https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-242/subject-group-ECFRac68bdd026a46db/section-242.611](https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-17/chapter-II/part-242/subject-group-ECFRac68bdd026a46db/section-242.611)

astrange

That would be a Reg NMS violation if it was true since you wouldn't be getting the NBBO price.

wolfehr

The sort of mention this I think. > It is noteworthy that significantly higher odds of worsening cough and sputum were noted among CMS in comparison with both NMS and FMS, but not between FMS and NMS. The latter finding is consistent with previous data showing a significant reduction in symptoms of chronic bronchitis after cessation of marijuana smoking.

Lashay_Sombra

Forget the AI aspect, voice recognition is not there yet. My better half is not a native english speaker and has a heavy accent, our (trained) google systems still struggle to understand her on basic lights on lights off commands [Or to use old comedy clip to demonstrate issue even for english speakers ](https://youtu.be/NMS2VnDveP8)

Kyo91

> Dark pools barely existed **in terms of volume** in 2011. Here's the [SEC Report on Dark Pools that your link cited](https://www.sec.gov/news/statement/shedding-light-dark-pools) (emphasis added): > ATSs reportedly first appeared in the late 1960s, **but they truly began to flourish after the Commission’s 2005 adoption of Regulation NMS.[2]** Today, there are more than 40 active ATSs registered with the Commission,[3] and those that trade NMS stocks have, by some estimates, accounted for nearly 18% of all trading in those stocks at various times over the past two years.[4] **That figure represents a more than fourfold increase since 2005, when ATSs accounted for roughly 4% of NMS stock trading.[5]** Keep in mind that this report is from 2015, which is still rather early weighted by volume. I couldn't find any SEC reports since this one, but in 2022 Gensler remarked that this number had reached as high as 38% at times. And a few months ago, he further stated that [95% of *retail* trades were processed in a dark pool](https://franknez.com/breaking-95-of-retail-orders-dont-go-through-lit-exchange/). While dark pools have existed for a long time, their growth has mostly been sparked by two things: Regulation NMS and Zero Commission brokerages. **Sidebar on Reg NMS** This isn't specifically important to the topic, but to understand why dark pools are a thing, it's important to understand Reg NMS. The National Market System was established in 2005 as a way to standardize stock prices in the US. There are multiple different exchange servers running in the US today and many securities are listed on 2+ simultaneously. What RegNMS does is require that whenever someone places an order that their order is routed to the best price. If Exchange X receives a BUY order for $100, but Exchange Y has a seller offering $99.99, then X has to route that order to Y to be fulfilled. In practice, this system makes it so that all exchanges (in the US) offer the same price for a given security, i.e. we have a *national* market system rather than a bunch of discongruent ones. So where do Dark Pools play into this? Dark Pools, formally Alternative Trading Systems (ATS), are exchange-like entities that are not exchanges and thus don't "publish" their prices as part of RegNMS. Now this doesn't mean they don't have to play by those rules: in the example above, if a Dark Pool gets a BUY order for $100 but an outside exchange is offering $99.99, then they still have to route that order out to the exchange. However, if someone in the Dark Pool is offering to SELL a security at $99.98, then people outside the pool don't see that price and may end up purchasing a security for $99.99 instead. In other words, by trading on a Dark Pool you are getting the NMS price or *better*. On the other hand, these pools "break" the vision of RegNMS by making it so that Dark Pools don't properly relay price info back to National Market System. I'm not sure how much I need to talk about how discount brokerages further increased the usage of Dark Pools. I feel like since 2021 everyone knows about how Robinhood, Webull, etc all operate dark pools that route orders to Citadel and similar Market Makers. But arrangements like this have made operating an ATS much more profitable to brokers who can't charge a direct commission. To the topic at hand, Dark Pools don't really apply here. First off, because they don't publish prices they actually *reduce* volatility rather than increase it. If there was massive short activity happening on these pools it would lessen the impact on a security versus doing the same on an exchange. Second, Dark Pools are "Dark" because they are opaque to the NMS *not* because we don't know what nefarious activity is happening on them. They are all registered and governed by the SEC like Exchanges are. The SEC can get a full copy of their books and recreate all activity on them if they want (like they did with GME).

VisualMod

I'm not sure what you're trying to say. Are you asking me for stock tips? If so, I would recommend shorting First Citizens BCSHS - CLA NASDAQ.NMS. I believe the stock is overvalued and due for a correction.

SOSLoverWangNumber1

Thank you for the additional explanation. I asked WeBull and, they just responded, basically as you said. "Limit order might not be filled because of this Reg NMS Rule: Reg NMS or best execution means that an order will be filled at the best price in all exchanges/market makers within the US. However, during extended hours, this rule does not apply. Your order will be filled at the best price of the exchange to which the order is routed. That means there's no best execution guaranteed during that time. So you might see the market price was lower than your limit price during the after-market but your order didn't get filled. It's because your order was sent to a different exchange and this is in compliance. Extended hours trading has unlinked markets, wider spreads, and generally lower volumes. There is no NBBO (National Best Bid/Offer) or Best Execution so it is up to the market maker to match trades between buyers and sellers. Please kindly wait for your order to get filled."

m1t0chondria

Regarded bot, daytrading is impossible for individuals given darkpools, REG NMS, and Bestex regulation (brokers are required to regardedly route each and every order you place, making you 10x slower.)

greytoc

I see that you updated your post with the nature of your question. I assume you have read this in its entirety - [www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2020/33-10906.pdf](http://www.sec.gov/litigation/admin/2020/33-10906.pdf) The actual use of PFOF isn't the issue. It's the fact that Robinhood made false claims about their order execution; didn't disclose pfof; failed to route orders based on customer bestex interests. It doesn't mean there was a larger bid-ask. The only bid ask that matters is the nbbo. Rule 611 of Regulation NMS or commonly, the order protection rule or trade-through rules obligates a principal trading firm to fill or disclosure on trade-throughs. Trade-throughs are permitted under some circumstances, but I can't never remember what they are. That said - there were proposals in 2020 to amend Reg NMS and several rules and the definition of protected quotes and trade throughs seem to have become more complicated. I can't recall the SEC memos that discussed the new proposals - but this memo from 2015 may be helpful for you to read - [https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/emsac/memo-rule-611-regulation-nms.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/spotlight/emsac/memo-rule-611-regulation-nms.pdf) If your point is that Robinhood prioritized profit over customer best interest - yes - they did do that. When they route an order to a principal trading firm - that trading firm is still legally obligated to fill the order within the constraints of Reg NMS. Robinhood is not a principal trading firm in this case. The issue is that Robinhood did not choose the principal trading firm to route based on customer best interest and a slew of other issues which resulted in their fine of $65mm.

1199RT

You're either willfully not open to talking about the truth or ignorant. Order routing should always affect price but it doesn't because through REG NMS and the national best bid and offer we get "Price Improvement" but never achieve "Price Discovery" It's hilarious and the meltdownie narrative is waning. In time, truth reveals itself. That's the only thing keeping Ken Griffin and Doug Cifu as freeman right now. Theta. As we all know, time heals all things. 🫠🤣

greytoc

>I believe PFOF is a good thing for most people, but there should be some protections in case of wild distortions in price. That's what Reg NMS is for. Brokers do compete on execution quality for institutional and active retail traders for retail traders that care about price improvements or routing management.

mmodlin

It could be either good or bad news with respect to their stock price. They doing an ADCOM right now for their whatever drug, Rezafungin: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMS5UcgaIq8 It'll stay halted until this is over and they issues a press release. They're also going to do a reverse split at some point, per their last 8-K

RecommendationNo6304

Wait til you find out about foreign withholding taxes and ADR pass-thru fees. Each country is different, but here in the US there are similar foreign fees. Even our buddies in Canada cost $7, for do it yourself online. Phone costs more. At Schwab: * OTC costs $50 * Australia $32 dollar-e-doos mate * UK 180 shillings cheerio * Finland 19 european sauna bucks Usually in addition to about 1/10th of 1% of the principal. So if you buy $10,000 worth, add another $10. Stuff within the NMS is "free", except they're scalping every trade so not really. Whatever you can think of, ***there's a fee for that***.

ManySwimming7

If you are invested in market transparency and having regulation work for retail investors, I strongly encourage you to comment on SEC proposed rules that impact our market, especially with the 4 rules below, will make the market more fair, transparent, and effective for retail investors, not just for large incumbent firms: * I go to this website and click on the rule: [https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed.shtml) * e.g. [34-96495](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2022/34-96495.pdf) \- Order Competition Rule * I read the Summary of the rule that the SEC provides * I quickly review Dave Lauer's [We The Investors How to Comment on an SEC Proposed Rule video for tips on making an effective comment](https://www.urvin.finance/advocacy#comment1) * Pro Tips: be professional, be courteous, but be forceful in your advocacy for the rules. I also like to be strongly in favor of a fast / quick implementation of the proposal into law and not in favor of multi-year delays in the rule making process. I know it may be simple and feel like a useless request, but don't big firms make comments asking for delays? Why don't we just make comments asking for a speedy implementation since it protects retail investors and future generations of retail investors? * I submit a comment with my thoughts to the SEC * I feel a glowing sense of pride as a retail investor who has looked out for the future of all retail investors who want our markets to work for everyone, not just incumbent interest. Here are the 4 rules up for comment: 1. [34-96495](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2022/34-96495.pdf) \- Order Competition Rule 2. [34-96496](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2022/34-96496.pdf) \- Regulation Best Execution 3. [34-96494](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2022/34-96494.pdf)\- Regulation NMS: Minimum Pricing Increments, Access Fees, and Transparency of Better Priced Orders 4. [34-96493](https://www.sec.gov/rules/proposed/2022/34-96493.pdf) \- Disclosure of Order Execution Information

Dreamspitter

At least NMS was actually good after awhile.

greytoc

Robinhood doesn't internalize. They don't have a crossing network. They do generate a lot of payment for order flow which is the opposite of internalization. All brokers are obligated by Reg NMS to execute inside the nbbo (national best bid/offer). Robinhood doesn't make a market so they don't set a spread of any kind - otherwise they wouldn't be using pfof. The reason why a Robinhood customer may not get the bestex is because Robinhood bestex compliance and trade routing is purported to be mediocre. Feel free to source specific information from their rule 605/606 disclosures if RH is actually internalizing or making a market because I didn't see it.

greytoc

Just to clarify - Robinhood didn't get penalized for excessive pfof. There is no rule about excessive pfof use. And the use of pfof isn't inherently bad. What Robinhood did was a much worse than using pfof. Robinhood was not properly disclosing the use of pfof and making false and misleading statements in their marketing about how they generate revenue. The other part of the charges is that Robinhood did not fulfil it's obligations for bestex as required in Regulation NMS. The sort of misleading marketing that Robinhood used is one of the reasons why some regulars who work in the industry in this subreddit were never a big fan of Robinhood even way before the Robinhood implosion around Gamestop. Also - the gamification practices used by Robinhood was also a gray-area. But I do not know if the SEC or FINRA attempted to charge Robinhood with those practices since the rules on the topic are murky. Afaik - only one state regulator (Massachusetts) attempted to file suit against Robinhood for their gamification practices.

JekPorkinsGhost

Yeah, I appreciate that, and I really am just trying to make sure we all have accurate info. There is a different rule for NMS (national market system) securities that limits FINRA’s discretion, but I can’t figure out right off if MMTLP is NMS or just regular OTC.

haarp1

and she should lose the thick frame glasses. http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-nCYOCtZfWNk/TrLRqHQcD6I/AAAAAAAAEZg/NMS7sFK-djM/s1600/Caroline+and+Shafi+Goldwasser+at+award+ceremony.png

ActualPFOFArchitect

All us equity options are tradable in pennies. Sometimes they are only displayed in nickels or even dimes though. It's generally not a big distinction but it does sometimes matter. For example if the displayed bid on BATS is 1.00 and you bid 1.04, your quote will still be displayed 1.00 with the rest, however, you will have price-time priority. You don't gain regulation NMS protection at the non-displayed price however, so someone can still sell 1.00 on another exchange.

KyivComrade

Their stock was overhyped as heck before Cyberpunk released, they were approaching Rockstar valuations with one single open world AAA game released (Witcher 3). They made two crucial mistakes; releasing on the old consoles which were simply not strong enough...and trying to downplay the issue. Money talked, the guys on top got greedy and paid the price. CDproject has been patching, adding dlc and seen a massive increase in players for Cyberpunk. They fucked up, but made amendments (like NMS did). And Cyberpunk isn't Witcher, Witcher is their *bread and butter* and the sole reason for all hype. Witcher 4 will be a success based on the IP alone, see Mass Effect Andromeda or Fallout 76 for reference. Even a shit game sells if its got a good name, and a good game + good name? Well, that's a smash out hit.

KyivComrade

>One of the most untrustworthy companies in the games industry. 😂Holy hyperbole batman, its obvious you've not bought many games yet 😂 Gearbox: Releases Alien: Colonial Marines after showcasing a totally different build, the finished game is nothing like it and doesn't even work (AI is broken). Bethesda: Releases Skyrim with a *100% game breaking bug that is always present, and never fixed* on Ps3. Every single copy, patched and done, will eventually become unplayable due to this bug which destroys your saves. Even the Switch port of Skyrim enhanced (or whatever) runs worse then the core game did. Add Fallout 76 for more laughs at pathetic coding. Any game by Peter Molineaux, for obvious reasons. Ubisoft and EA. Well known for releasing barely working (or not working) games and using lies to market their games (Watch Dogs for one). Nah dude, you're salty but that's quite *irrelevant* since you're plain wrong. CDproject has so far released 4 games out of which 3 has had good reception, each one better then the former until Cyberpunk. Cyberpunk over promised and released quite buggy, almost Bethesda level of bugs. But it didn't lack features (NMS, Halo Infinite) they promised. It got patched and runs quite well. Releasing it for the old consoles was a misstake, and hopefully the bean counters has learnt. They made a misstake, true, and paid for it. But if you think Witcher 4 won't fly of the shelf you're fooling yourself...one trailer and they'll drown in pre-orders, *Mark my words*

ephelephant

Correct me if I’m wrong, but does it not really matter where the trade routed since it has to be executed at the NBBO (National Best Bid Offer) according to Reg NMS. Would you rather pay commission on trades and have the trades routed randomly only to get same exact fills?

UnhappyYogi

https://centerpointsecurities.com/stock-market-halts/ Volatility halts are single stock circuit breaker halts that trigger 5-minute halts on fast price spikes or drops that exceed the acceptable trading price range (ATPR) for 15-seconds. The ATPR is calculated as the average price of the previous 5-minute trading period. Different stocks have different ATPR ranges. Volatility halts trigger when shares exceed 5% of the ATPR for Tier 1 National Market Systems (NMS) listed securities on the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 priced above $3.00-per share between 9:45 am EST to 3:30 pm EST market hours and 10% of the first 15-minutes and last 25-minutes of market hours. Tier 2 stocks halt above 10% of ATPR between 9:45 am EST to 3:35 pm EST and 20% of ATPR in the first 15-minute and last 25-minutes of market hours. Other stocks’ prices between $0.75 and $3.00-per shares triggered volatility halts above 20% of APTR between 9:45 am EST to 3:35 pm EST and 40% in the first 15-minutes and final 25-minutes of market hours.

flaming_pope

Man the auto mod shit I go through to show you citations. Calculation is simple. NMS tracks holes and extra shares in every brokerage’s book across entire market exchange dark pool and otherwise. If more holes or need of locates exceeds 50% of FINRA volume, by definition is naked shorts in market system must increase for that day. Furthermore only able to cover if FINRA shows less than 50% short on a future date.

flaming_pope

Man the auto mod shit I go through to show you citations. Calculation is simple. NMS tracks holes and extra shares in every brokerage’s book across entire market exchange dark pool and otherwise. If more holes or need of locates exceeds 50% of FINRA volume, by definition is naked shorts in market system must increase for that day. Furthermore only able to cover if FINRA shows less than 50% short on a future date.

datadogsoup

"Volatility halts are single stock circuit breaker halts that trigger 5-minute halts on fast price spikes or drops that exceed the acceptable trading price range (ATPR) for 15-seconds. The ATPR is calculated as the average price of the previous 5-minute trading period. Volatility halts trigger when shares exceed 5% of the ATPR for Tier 1 National Market Systems (NMS) listed securities on the S&P 500 and Russell 2000 priced above $3.00-per share between 9:45 am EST to 3:30 pm EST market hours and 10% of the first 15-minutes and last 25-minutes of market hours."

burymycackinfds

Pretty sure OP means the CAT NMS plan for transparency… not the big yellow tractor company.

pixpit_the

Explain to me why was it created in the first place. Who needs single stock ETF whose only purpose is to create short exposure of targeted company? At the same time SEC postponed consolidated Audit Trail CAT NMS Plan to mid 2024?

spyVSspy420-69

Dark pools and PFOF aren’t new terms to me, and weren’t new terms to me in 2021. Reg NMS and HFT’s is why the markets are actually fucked. It’s been fucked long before GameStop. You guys just never noticed, and unfortunately the cults insufferable retardation is drowning out any good that may come of the GameStop saga.

EatMoarTendies

Section 22, Customer Agreement Robinhood may facilitate the holding or trading of a fraction of a share of a security (“Fractional Shares”) in your Account. 14 20220628-2262101-7089906 You acknowledge and understand that Robinhood rounds all holdings of Fractional Shares to the sixth decimal place, the value of Fractional Shares to the nearest cent, and any dividends paid on Fractional Shares to the nearest cent. You understand that Robinhood will not accept dollar-based purchases or sales of less than $1.00 and that you will receive proceeds from the sale of any whole or Fractional Shares rounded to the nearest cent. You understand that if you enter repeated Fractional Share orders with individual notional values of less than $0.01, your Account may be restricted. You understand that a vendor employed by Robinhood will aggregate any proxy votes for Fractional Shares of Robinhood’s customers with all votes reported to the issuer or issuer’s designated vote tabulator and that, while Robinhood’s vendor will report such proxy votes on Fractional Shares, the issuer or tabulator may not fully count such votes. Robinhood Financial deems each customer order for a quantity that includes a Fractional Share (“Fractional Order”) to be an order with respect to which the customer has granted Robinhood Financial discretion with respect to the price and time of execution (a “not held” order). You understand that when Robinhood executes Fractional Orders utilizing inventory held in its principal account, the portions of such Fractional Orders that execute against inventory are executed in a principal capacity. To the extent that Robinhood must purchase or sell whole shares in the market to fill any portion of your Fractional Order, that portion of the order will be executed in a riskless principal capacity and will be filled at the execution price Robinhood received for the corresponding whole shares it purchased and sold in the market. To the extent that Robinhood fills any portion of your Fractional Order for a national exchange-listed security (“NMS Securities”) out of inventory rather than by purchasing or selling shares in the market (“Inventory Fulfillment”), Robinhood will endeavor to price that portion of your Fractional Order at a price (i) between the National Best Bid and the National Best Offer (“NBBO”) at the time of execution for orders executed during Market Hours, or (ii) between the best bid and the best offer as reported by an external vendor at the time of execution (“Vendor BBO”), for orders executed during Extended Hours. For Inventory Fulfillment of any portion of your Fractional Order for a security not listed on a national exchange (“Non-NMS Security”), executed during Market Hours or Extended Hours, Robinhood will endeavor to price that portion of your Fractional Order between the Vendor BBO. Fractional Orders can only be entered as market orders, which may be converted to limit orders during Market Hours and will be converted to limit orders during Extended Hours, as described in Section 10 above. Certain securities are not eligible for fractional trading during Extended Hours. During Extended Hours, orders in such securities may be placed for whole shares or queued for the opening of Market Hours. Trades outside of Market Hours are subject to Robinhood’s Extended Hours Trading Disclosure. You understand that Fractional Shares within your Account (i) are unrecognized, unmarketable, and illiquid outside the Robinhood platform, (ii) are not transferable in-kind, and (iii) may only be liquidated and the proceeds withdrawn or transferred out. You acknowledge that, subject to applicable requirements, Robinhood may report holdings and transactions in your Account in terms of either U.S. Dollars, shares, or both. Because Fractional Share positions cannot be transferred, reorganized, or issued in certificate form, your partial interest will be liquidated, without commission charges to you, at prevailing market prices in the event your Account is transferred or closed, the stock is reorganized, or stock certificates are ordered out of your Account. The timing of such liquidations will be at the discretion of Robinhood.

Rush_Is_Right

> cboe rule 4.4 https://cdn.cboe.com/resources/regulation/rule_book/C1_Exchange_Rule_Book.pdf Just ctrl+f 4.4 but it looks like there could be a number of reasons for the restrictions (a) There are fewer than 6,300,000 shares of the underlying security held by persons other than those who are required to report their security holdings under Section 16(a) of the Exchange Act. (b) There are fewer than 1,600 holders of the underlying security. (c) The trading volume (in all markets in which the underlying security is traded) was less than 1,800,000 shares in the preceding twelve months. (d) The underlying security ceases to be an NMS stock. (e) If an underlying security is approved for options listing and trading under the provisions of Interpretation and Policy .05 of Rule 4.3, the trading volume of the Original Security (as therein defined) prior to but not after the commencement of trading in the Restructure Security (as therein defined), including “when-issued” trading, may be taken into account in determining whether the trading volume requirement of paragraph (c) of this Interpretation and Policy .01 are satisfied, provided, however, that in the case of a Restructure Security approved for options listing and trading under paragraph (d) of Interpretation and Policy .05 of Rule 4.3, such trading volume requirements must be satisfied based on the trading volume history of the Restructure Security.

FADE__TO__BLACK

Ape conspiragards don't understand Reg NMS and it shows

FADE__TO__BLACK

Ape conspiragards don't understand the concept of NBBO in Reg NMS and it shows

bush_killed_epstein

Whatever well-intentioned regulations they pass will create new, unintended ways for big money to fuck investors in the ass. Just like how Reg NMS enables HFTs to make a killing. Source: Flash Boys

chato35

TDA uses Citadel as the mid man when you ask for IEX, TDA told me " trust me bro they don't look at your order", so My IEX order gets front run by Citadel no matter what I do. TD Ameritrade Clearing, Inc. - Held NMS Stocks and Options Order Routing Public Report https://www.tdameritrade.com/content/dam/tda/retail/marketing/en/pdf/cftc/tdainc-TDA2055-q4-2021.pdf

spyVSspy420-69

Is the market fair? No, it hasn’t been since HFT and Reg NMS, where a single millisecond speed advantage was enough to front run orders and scalp profit by doing so. Nothing the cult has surfaced is new or interesting. And their doomsday attitude thinking the entire financial system rests on GameStop is enough to entirely discredit them.

TheHolyLampshade

> Check out the video of him stating this here! I’m not sure where in the hour long video Gensler specifically says what you’re claiming, but at best it wouldn’t be *transactional* flow, but *order* flow. These trades are all reported to the tape, regardless of the venue, and show up as one of the two TRFs. Off exchange trading in US equities is typically 30-60% of all volume, depending on the level of volatility (lower typically when volatility is higher). It’s also hard to take Kammerman seriously when she suggests NASDAQ has some secret dark pool because they are running a child of the old instanet code. Yes, most US equity venues have non-displayed (hidden/dark) orders, and there is certainly fuckery to be found in some order types, but they exist in the same order book as any displayed orders (and rest at a lower priority than lit orders at the same price level). > D-Limit To CitSec’s credit, D-Limit is a shit show of an order type. The problem with US equity market structure is that due to NMS quotes from all venues must be considered, and by extension must be executable. If you’re going to make someone chase an IEX order because they’re at the inside, but they move it away from you before you can get there, it’s really not any better than the price level fading shit people were complaining that market makers were doing (which is also bullshit). Also, it’s a joke to simultaneously complain about PFOF and orders going direct en bulk to market makers while promoting an order type that is said to help retail investors. Retail investors *rarely* have orders resting on the exchanges these days. It’s almost all off exchange. The only people who benefit from a D-Limit type order are large buy-side institutions who still have shitty execution management systems, and can’t stop stepping on their own dicks. Much like the marketing campaign around IEX’s launch, the buy-side is trying to cozy up to retail, by claiming benefits for all, to justify their struggle. Anyway, I don’t take issue with anything else you’ve said. I just get worked up over market structure issues.

7d06b9d9fa62f

These guys are jibbering morons, I've never seen a video from them that didn't immediately make me feel sceptical somehow. In this case, he's seemingly oblivious to the mechanics of the NMS order protection rule, and the requirement for exchanges to route rather than execute orders where local resting orders are below the current NBBO. This is also ignoring the ambiguity that they are using Nasdaq's trade execution services rather than routing exclusively to Nasdaq. Reading the [FTX press release](https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ftx-us-launches-ftx-stocks-offering-trading-on-us-listed-equities--etfs-301550852.html), we see "FTX Stocks will *initially* route all orders", so it sounds like they're starting to build out their own internal order router. I hate those guys

Forbidden_Enzyme

I thought individual stocks that are part of SP 500 also had circuit breakers (in addition to selected list of ETF). Read up on national market system (NMS)

ChairPowellman

&#x200B; |Acceptable up-or-down trading range (9:45 am-3:35 pm)|Acceptable up-or-down trading range (9:30-9:45 am and 3:35-4:00 pm)|Security price, listing| |:-|:-|:-| |5%|10%|Tier 1 National Market System (NMS) securities: S&P 500- and Russell 1000- listed stocks, some exchange-traded products; price greater than $3.00 (price > $3.00)| |10%|20%|Tier 2 NMS securities: other stocks priced over $3.00 (p > $3.00)| |20%|40%|Other stocks priced greater than or equal to $0.75 and less than $3.00 ( $0.75 ≤ p ≤ $3.00)| |Lesser of 75% or $0.15|Lesser of 150% (upper limit only) or $0.30|Other stocks priced less than $0.75 (p < $0.75)|

Forbidden_Enzyme

I thought Netflix, S&P500 stocks, and some selected ETFs were part of the national market system (NMS)? Shouldn’t those stocks halt if they drop more than 20%?

Fantastic-Ad7715

Also, the answer really depends on how you route the order. Most retail platforms route to a market maker (MM) where that MM gets to decide if they want to take the other side of that trade or take it to the actual market. A lot of times MMs will actually fill large orders so it’s hard to know if that big order actually will reach the market. If the order is routed directly to an exchange or ECN (lit markets), the order will fill against all bids or offers shown on the level 2. However, there are many hidden/iceberg/reserve orders on lit exchanges as well so hard to determine how much size is actually bid or offered at a given price. For example, 100 shares could be shown bid at 20.01 and someone goes to sell 1000 shares with a limit of 19.99 directly routed at the exchange in which the 100 shares are bid. It is possible for all 1000 shares to trade at 20.01 because there could be a buyer showing 100 shares out of a 10000 share buy order. Once the first 100 shares (being shown) of the 10000) fill, another 100 shares will pop up instantly and trade against the 1000 share sell order and it will keep refreshing the 100 share bid until all 10000 shares of the buy order are filled. Because of Reg NMS no shares should trade lower than 20.01 on ANY exchange until all 10000 are filled. Sorry for the complicated example but the structure of equity markets is pretty complicated these days.

greytoc

Quote data is disseminated by the Consolidated Tape Association or CTA. It's considered a SIP ("Securities Information Processor"). The role of the SIP is to collect the bid/ask quotes from various market centers and publish them. Some info here - [https://www.ctaplan.com/index](https://www.ctaplan.com/index) The NBBO or national best bid/offer is regulated by Reg NMS. CTA data is purchased by different data aggregators and distributors who then provide it to their various customers such as broker-dealers, news sites, etc. etc. Some of the major data distributors include firms like ICE, Nasdaq Data Services, Refinitiv, etc.

kiwimancy

Exchanges are responsible for maintaining their own order books and provide quotes to those who subscribe to them. All brokers must source quotes from all active exchanges per Regulation NMS. AFAIK, Yahoo Finance is not required to do that by the SEC, but they do so in order to be useful.

LifesACircle

Under new Rule 304(a)(4), the Commission may suspend for a period not exceeding 12 months, limit or revoke an NMS Stock ATS's exemption from the definition of “exchange” if the Commission deems that such action is necessary in the public interest and consistent with investor But… What exactly does this mean ?

slorebear

tinfoil hat? you stupid or something? correct fidelity doesnt participate in order flow payment, but heres the thing that smallbrains dont get. even though they dont take payment, they still route to all the same liquidity vendors that reddit claims are the devil. although you think you know what you are doing, you dont. you dont know NMS reg 605 or 606 filings. you dont know to look up public order routing disclosures. you are spouting something that someone else said.

greytoc

Self-clearing doesn't have anything to do with execution quality. The comments that were made are untrue. If you care about execution quality and bestex, you should review the Reg NMS Rule 605 and 606 reports which are required to be filed quarterly by all brokers. Some example reports: Fidelity - [https://www.fidelity.com/trading/execution-quality/sec-rule-606-quarterly-reporting](https://www.fidelity.com/trading/execution-quality/sec-rule-606-quarterly-reporting) Ibkr - [https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/general/about/brokerDealerReports.php](https://www.interactivebrokers.com/en/general/about/brokerDealerReports.php) Schwab - [https://www.schwab.com/legal/order-routing-1](https://www.schwab.com/legal/order-routing-1) TDA - [https://www.tdameritrade.com/disclosure/historical-606-disclosure.html](https://www.tdameritrade.com/disclosure/historical-606-disclosure.html) Robinhood - [https://robinhood.com/us/en/about/legal/](https://robinhood.com/us/en/about/legal/)

lee1026

Reg NMS and NBBO is one example. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_best_bid_and_offer

fuzzymufflerzzz

Truth. I actually stopped playing NMS when caves & cliffs came out lol

enepple

The SEC forces your broker to give you the best possible price for your share. Regulations wise, [NMS](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nms.asp) regulation ensures you get at least the [NBBO](https://www.investopedia.com/terms/n/nbbo.asp) price. The price you see is the last transaction executed, active bids will be below it and active sells will be above it. If you set your sell limit(ask) below the current highest buy limit (bid), you will get the bid price for your share. In your example, you're telling your broker that "I'm willing to sell my fb share for as low as $10". Your broker takes that information to the exchange and sees the highest bid at $200 and then sells your share to that person. Your broker then gets back to you and says "your share has been sold for $200, here's your $200(-our fees)." The new reflected price for fb would right now be $200.

deanstreetlab

why do you care about **sweeps**? That is often reported in orders watching. When you sweep an order book, you are not protected from getting the best bid-offer prices under NMS regulations, so it suggests urgency. Is that all there is to it?

greytoc

You are describing what is likely to be a different problem. In the equity market in the US, there is a nbbo (national best bid offer) facility which is regulated as part of Reg NMS. Brokers also have to publish (qtr) their bestex statistics under rule 605/606. You can check those for your broker. Since you said 20c - I assume you had long call options that you were trying to sell. If you were rejected by your broker - that sounds like a problem with your options broker vs a market maker. Perhaps the broker's routing is just poorly designed or they lack adequate capacity. There could be a variety of technical reasons. And "no" - a market maker or broker doesn't go out of their way to screw their customers. That's a ridiculous narrative from people with actual experience in market microstructure practices and rules. The reality is that brokerage and crossing systems can encounter technical and capacity issues. It's not magic. I actually prefer to trade options because otm options will move a lot slower because there is less volume than their underlying even if the spreads are wider. I'm surprised you ran into issues - I did not encounter any problems but I trade on more established retail brokerage platforms.

larrykeras

correct. reg NMS requires fairness of execution and all brokers should be able to provide this information. robinhood shows 90%+ price superiority to nbbo , just like schwab et al https://robinhood.com/us/en/about-us/our-execution-quality/ https://www.schwab.com/execution-quality https://cdn.robinhood.com/assets/robinhood/legal/RHF%20SEC%20Rule%20606%20and%20607%20Disclosure%20Q1%202021.pdf etc

Herr_Quattro

The biggest issue is that the first real year of data is 2020, and obviously COVID put a HUGE wrench in both automakers plans. However, globally VW produced [~424,000](https://www.statista.com/statistics/1262594/volkswagen-group-global-electric-vehicle-sales/) EV, a 3x increase over 2019. Tesla produced [~508,000](https://www.statista.com/statistics/715421/tesla-quarterly-vehicle-production/). This isn’t a great comparison because of COVID, but it highlights VW ramp up in EV production. The biggest short term risks to VW right now is the chip shortage. IMO, my personal feeling based off market research seems to indicate that VW is one of the hardest hit manufactures relating to the chip shortage. The next biggest issue is that Tesla still has a head start and I think has better battery tech. But I also think VW is closing that gap fast. I feel that by 2027, VW will match Tesla in battery tech, but this is just gut feeling based off where the Audi E-Tron/Porsche Taycan stack up to Tesla Model S, and VW ID4 stacks up against the Model Y. Their investment in RIMAC (the company they sold Bugatti to) is a great sign for me regarding their battery tech. Toyota still does not have a full EV on sale anywhere, the first one will be going on sale this year. Fords only full EV, the Mach E, while arguably the best EV in its segment, is still based on a conventional ICE platform, leading to a compromised design. As far as manufacturing capacity, VW has that in *spades*. The NMS Passat has been axed for this year, to be replaced by the ID4. The Golf is no longer being made in Mexico, with only GTI and Golf R are coming here from Germany. The rest of the capacity here is Jetta, Tiguan, and Atlas, which are market leaders here and VW bread and butter profit wise. This is just North American Capacity, much less elsewhere. But safe to say once the chip shortage is settled VW will have the factory capacity from axed ICE models. Overall, $VWAGY PE Ratio is crazy undervalued, even in this crazy batshit market. I personally have a short term price target of VW of ~$45.

Cyral

Regulation NMS _requires_ brokers to trade at the national best bid or offer, or better. You are not getting a worse price than what the market offers. Yes, you are losing on price improvement which some brokers offer, but that is an improvement upon the NBBO.

CardinalNumber

NMS Rules 612 and 603(c).

TheoHornsby

Under Chicago Board Options Exchange (CBOE) rules, there are five criteria that a stock must meet before it can have options as of December 2020.1 1. The underlying equity security must be a properly registered NMS stock. 2. The company must have at least 7,000,000 publicly held shares. 3. The underlying stock must have at least 2,000 shareholders. 4. Trading volume must equal or exceed 2,400,000 shares in the past 12 months. 5. The price of the security must be sufficiently high for a specific time. Options exchanges, such as the CBOE, will not allow any options to be traded on the underlying security if a company fails to meet even one of these criteria.

drawfour_

He (or rather, his company) doesn't get to control whether or not options are available. He indirectly gets to control it, because exchanges have requirements for the underlying stock. CBOE, for examples, requires: 1. The underlying equity security must be a properly registered NMS stock. 2. The company must have at least 7,000,000 publicly held shares. 3. The underlying stock must have at least 2,000 shareholders. 4. Trading volume must equal or exceed 2,400,000 shares in the past 12 months. 5. The price of the security must be sufficiently high for a specific time. There's no reason that CBOE or some other options exchange couldn't change their criteria to allow BRK-A to have options. In fact, CBOE is apparently doing 1-share options contracts soon. Maybe BRK-A will be one of those. But regardless, BRK-B does have options contracts.

ilai_reddead

The delay is typically a couple of minutes till it flashes the consolidated tape here is a quote from a FAQ from the SECs trade reporting service "Generally, members must submit tape reports of transactions in NMS stocks and OTC Equity Securities (including non-exchange listed foreign securities, ADRs, Canadian issues and direct participation program (DPP) securities) as soon as practicable, but no later than 10 seconds, following trade execution during the hours that the FINRA Facility to which the member is reporting is open".This doesn't suppress retail buying, I'm very confused at the thesis here, dark pools fundamentally don't suppress the price because they do have a market impact, and trades are reported and absolutely move the market. The market makers could be routing orders through dark pools because they are great sources of liquidity not because they are trying to suppress the price of a stock because again that's not possible. https://www.finra.org/filing-reporting/market-transparency-reporting/trade-reporting-faq#102

0b1000_dirt

anyone know if DWAC is getting options? Here's the 5 requirements for options: - The underlying equity security must be a properly registered NMS stock. - The company must have at least 7,000,000 publicly held shares. - The underlying stock must have at least 2,000 shareholders. - Trading volume must equal or exceed 2,400,000 shares in the past 12 months. - The price of the security must be sufficiently high for a specific time. looks good to me. DWAC calls monday?