+Follow
RotiPlanta
No personal profile
14
Follow
1
Followers
0
Topic
0
Badge
Posts
Hot
RotiPlanta
2021-02-09
?
Sorry, the original content has been removed
RotiPlanta
2021-02-04
Interesting
As GameStop showed, anyone can manipulate the market. Here's how to fix that
Go to Tiger App to see more news
{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3556666999577875","uuid":"3556666999577875","gmtCreate":1593611001802,"gmtModify":1612406087788,"name":"RotiPlanta","pinyin":"rotiplanta","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/26c30c2f9324312c5289e239352652be","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":14,"tweetSize":3,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-3","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":" Tiger Idol","description":"Join the tiger community for 1500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.08.13","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-1","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"Boss Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $100,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8dfc27c1ee0e25db1c93e9d0b641101","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f43908c142f8a33c78f5bdf0e2897488","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/82165ff19cb8a786e8919f92acee5213","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":"60.30%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-1","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Elite Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 30","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ab0f87127c854ce3191a752d57b46edc","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9835ce48b8c8743566d344ac7a7ba8c","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76754b53ce7a90019f132c1d2fbc698f","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":"60.42%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":3,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":383925486,"gmtCreate":1612831974645,"gmtModify":1704874724773,"author":{"id":"3556666999577875","authorId":"3556666999577875","name":"RotiPlanta","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/26c30c2f9324312c5289e239352652be","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3556666999577875","authorIdStr":"3556666999577875"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"?","listText":"?","text":"?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/383925486","repostId":"1195153829","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1195153829","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612781502,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1195153829?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-08 18:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here’s What the GameStop Affair Has Taught Us","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1195153829","media":"Barrons","summary":"This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers","content":"<p><i>This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers and has been edited by Barron’s.</i></p>\n<p>What GameStop Taught Us</p>\n<p><i>The Weekly Speculator</i></p>\n<p><i>Marketfield Asset Management</i></p>\n<p>marketfield.com</p>\n<p>Feb. 4: After all is said and done, one of the most lasting effects of theGameStop(ticker: GME) episode will be to educate many market participants about the key role and ultimate power held by the clearing institution, the Depository Trust Company. One of the stranger aspects of the affair has been the attempt to paint it as some form of moral crusade, or an opportunity for the “little guy” to get even with Wall Street. The truth is that some large investors lost a great deal of money, while others were well rewarded, just as some small investors will have reaped life-changing sums while others will have lost funds that may prove to be equally impactful. In this sense, the market is a meritocracy, which isn’t quite the same as saying that it is always fair in delivering outcomes.</p>\n<p>What is also clear is that late January saw a very significant degrossing of levered hedge-fund investors, without causing a deep correction in the equity market. The S&P 500 essentially respected support at the 50-day moving average, and didn’t need to move down to 3600, which we had set as a “worst case” target. The Nasdaq 100, Russell 2000, and MSCI Emerging Markets Index didn’t need to touch their corresponding trend support, and all three indexes managed to generate a positive return in January, unlike the S&P 500, which registered a small loss. The subsequent bounce has been rapid and broad, as would be expected from a catalyst that was both technical and ephemeral in nature.</p>\n<p>That it is not a wholly positive or inconsequential affair. The long bull market is now showing signs of developing into a historic mania. This doesn’t mean that a market peak is imminent, but the normative process—whereby what is “appropriate” is ultimately influenced by extremes—means that the levels of risk being taken by the average investor are probably significantly higher than they were pre-Covid.</p>\n<p>—Michael Shaoul, Timothy Brackett</p>\n<p>Heigh-Ho Silver!</p>\n<p><i>The Aden Forecast Weekly Update</i></p>\n<p><i>The Aden Forecast</i></p>\n<p>adenforecast.com</p>\n<p>Feb. 4: Silver caught on fire by zipping up to the August highs near $30 on Monday during the Reddit buying frenzy. Silver was strong anyway, and it’s been holding up well, so whoever pegged silver knew what they were doing. Silver shares also got a big boost upward, and while they have since calmed down, it looks like volatility will stay with us. Silver has been holding above its 15-week moving average since December, and it’ll remain strong by staying above it at $25. The next milestone to surpass is the $30 level, the highs for this bull market. If clearly broken, another leg up will be underway. Keep your silver and silver share positions.</p>\n<p>—Mary Anne and Pamela Aden</p>\n<p>How to Play Oil’s Recent Rally</p>\n<p><i>Daily Insights</i></p>\n<p><i>BCA Research</i></p>\n<p><i>bcaresearch.com</i></p>\n<p>Feb 4: The recent oil rally will have consequences for asset prices beyond the energy market. While higher oil prices benefit oil exporters, they hurt the economies of oil importers, often with a lag.</p>\n<p>A great example of these dynamics is China. The Chinese economy is a large oil importer; hence, rising oil prices act as a tax on Chinese growth. Moreover, Chinese A shares massively overweight tech stocks, which receive no benefit from higher energy prices. In fact, over the past four years, increasing Brent prices reliably lead to a decline in on-shore domestic markets by roughly three months. The current setup is reminiscent of early 2018. Back then, Chinese A shares had been rallying for a few months after oil prices had started to rally. Ultimately, a deceleration in Chinese growth and cautious policy making from Beijing resulted in a powerful selloff of Chinese equities. Today, Chinese growth is once again decelerating and Beijing is conducting some significant regulatory tightening, while the People’s Bank of China is draining liquidity. Thus, a significant correction in Chinese shares is likely this spring.</p>\n<p>A lower-octane strategy to play these dynamics is to go long United Kingdom equities relative to Germany’s while espousing the implicit currency exposure. German equities are extremely underweight energy, and Germany imports its entire oil consumption. Meanwhile, the U.K. benchmark is replete with energy stocks and the U.K. remains an oil producer, even if it imports some of its oil (rising Brent represents a comparatively smaller tax on the U.K. economy). As a side benefit, the pound is very cheap against the euro and the U.K.’s vaccination campaign is massively ahead of the eurozone’s, which could result in earlier economic dividends north of the Channel and hurt the euro/pound in the process.</p>\n<p>—Mathieu Savary and Team</p>\n<p>High-Yield Opportunities</p>\n<p><i>Carret Credit Insight</i></p>\n<p><i>Carret Asset Mangaement</i></p>\n<p>carret.com</p>\n<p>Feb. 3: At year-end 2020, the iBoxx High-Yield Index yielded 4.23%, an all-time low. Spreads also registered record tightness. Low yields aren’t a surprise as investors globally reach for income. The Federal Reserve has backstopped the “fallen angels,” allowing many high-yield (HY) companies to refinance at ever-lower rates and extend upcoming maturities for another day. Strong equity markets are forecasting an earnings rebound, and the vaccines will bring brighter days soon. We continue to find attractive values in the short/intermediate portion of the high-quality HY market.</p>\n<p>We want to share a recent academic study with you regarding the risk and returns in the HY bond market: George Mason Universityrecently publisheda report on HY bond-fund returns and volatility relative to equities (S&P 500). Since 1990, the average HY bond fund has delivered average annualized returns of 7.1% with a volatility of 7.7%. Over the same time period, the S&P 500 delivered an average annualized return of 7.8%, but with almost double the volatility of 14.5%. The conclusion: HY bonds have paid total returns near those of the U.S. stock market with half of the volatility. We believe the HY market will offer competitive returns in the decade ahead, as equity valuations have risen and Treasury yields have plummeted. Our ability to utilize busted convertibles, preferreds, and special-situation income investments enhances our cash-flow opportunities.</p>\n<p>—Jason R. Graybill, Neil D. Klein</p>\n<p>Emerging Markets Blast Off</p>\n<p><i>PCM Report</i></p>\n<p><i>Peak Capital Management</i></p>\n<p>pcmstrategies.com</p>\n<p>Feb. 1: So far, 2021 has been a good year for emerging-market equities. Year to date, theiShares MSCI Emerging Marketsexchange-traded fund (EEM) is higher by roughly 8%, compared to a gain of approximately 3% for theSPDR S&P 500ETF (SPY). Ever since the financial crisis of 2008, emerging markets collectively have woefully lagged U.S. equities.</p>\n<p>What could propel the asset class higher in 20201 and beyond? In the long term, the likely catalyst is demographics. Developed markets such as the U.S. and Europe have aging populations, which could suggest lower productivity and gross-domestic-product growth over the next decade compared to emerging-market economies.</p>\n<p>In its most recent capital-markets report, JPMorgan projected GDP growth across emerging markets to be 3.9% in 2021, compared to 1.6% across developed markets. The report suggests China and India will drive GDP growth, and emerging markets’ productivity and human capital will gradually converge to developed-market levels.</p>\n<p>—Clint Pekrul</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title> Here’s What the GameStop Affair Has Taught Us</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n Here’s What the GameStop Affair Has Taught Us\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-08 18:51 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/gamestop-episode-offers-lessons-for-investors-51612572300?mod=RTA><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers and has been edited by Barron’s.\nWhat GameStop Taught Us\nThe Weekly Speculator\nMarketfield Asset ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/gamestop-episode-offers-lessons-for-investors-51612572300?mod=RTA\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","GME":"游戏驿站"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/gamestop-episode-offers-lessons-for-investors-51612572300?mod=RTA","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1195153829","content_text":"This commentary was issued recently by money managers, research firms, and market newsletter writers and has been edited by Barron’s.\nWhat GameStop Taught Us\nThe Weekly Speculator\nMarketfield Asset Management\nmarketfield.com\nFeb. 4: After all is said and done, one of the most lasting effects of theGameStop(ticker: GME) episode will be to educate many market participants about the key role and ultimate power held by the clearing institution, the Depository Trust Company. One of the stranger aspects of the affair has been the attempt to paint it as some form of moral crusade, or an opportunity for the “little guy” to get even with Wall Street. The truth is that some large investors lost a great deal of money, while others were well rewarded, just as some small investors will have reaped life-changing sums while others will have lost funds that may prove to be equally impactful. In this sense, the market is a meritocracy, which isn’t quite the same as saying that it is always fair in delivering outcomes.\nWhat is also clear is that late January saw a very significant degrossing of levered hedge-fund investors, without causing a deep correction in the equity market. The S&P 500 essentially respected support at the 50-day moving average, and didn’t need to move down to 3600, which we had set as a “worst case” target. The Nasdaq 100, Russell 2000, and MSCI Emerging Markets Index didn’t need to touch their corresponding trend support, and all three indexes managed to generate a positive return in January, unlike the S&P 500, which registered a small loss. The subsequent bounce has been rapid and broad, as would be expected from a catalyst that was both technical and ephemeral in nature.\nThat it is not a wholly positive or inconsequential affair. The long bull market is now showing signs of developing into a historic mania. This doesn’t mean that a market peak is imminent, but the normative process—whereby what is “appropriate” is ultimately influenced by extremes—means that the levels of risk being taken by the average investor are probably significantly higher than they were pre-Covid.\n—Michael Shaoul, Timothy Brackett\nHeigh-Ho Silver!\nThe Aden Forecast Weekly Update\nThe Aden Forecast\nadenforecast.com\nFeb. 4: Silver caught on fire by zipping up to the August highs near $30 on Monday during the Reddit buying frenzy. Silver was strong anyway, and it’s been holding up well, so whoever pegged silver knew what they were doing. Silver shares also got a big boost upward, and while they have since calmed down, it looks like volatility will stay with us. Silver has been holding above its 15-week moving average since December, and it’ll remain strong by staying above it at $25. The next milestone to surpass is the $30 level, the highs for this bull market. If clearly broken, another leg up will be underway. Keep your silver and silver share positions.\n—Mary Anne and Pamela Aden\nHow to Play Oil’s Recent Rally\nDaily Insights\nBCA Research\nbcaresearch.com\nFeb 4: The recent oil rally will have consequences for asset prices beyond the energy market. While higher oil prices benefit oil exporters, they hurt the economies of oil importers, often with a lag.\nA great example of these dynamics is China. The Chinese economy is a large oil importer; hence, rising oil prices act as a tax on Chinese growth. Moreover, Chinese A shares massively overweight tech stocks, which receive no benefit from higher energy prices. In fact, over the past four years, increasing Brent prices reliably lead to a decline in on-shore domestic markets by roughly three months. The current setup is reminiscent of early 2018. Back then, Chinese A shares had been rallying for a few months after oil prices had started to rally. Ultimately, a deceleration in Chinese growth and cautious policy making from Beijing resulted in a powerful selloff of Chinese equities. Today, Chinese growth is once again decelerating and Beijing is conducting some significant regulatory tightening, while the People’s Bank of China is draining liquidity. Thus, a significant correction in Chinese shares is likely this spring.\nA lower-octane strategy to play these dynamics is to go long United Kingdom equities relative to Germany’s while espousing the implicit currency exposure. German equities are extremely underweight energy, and Germany imports its entire oil consumption. Meanwhile, the U.K. benchmark is replete with energy stocks and the U.K. remains an oil producer, even if it imports some of its oil (rising Brent represents a comparatively smaller tax on the U.K. economy). As a side benefit, the pound is very cheap against the euro and the U.K.’s vaccination campaign is massively ahead of the eurozone’s, which could result in earlier economic dividends north of the Channel and hurt the euro/pound in the process.\n—Mathieu Savary and Team\nHigh-Yield Opportunities\nCarret Credit Insight\nCarret Asset Mangaement\ncarret.com\nFeb. 3: At year-end 2020, the iBoxx High-Yield Index yielded 4.23%, an all-time low. Spreads also registered record tightness. Low yields aren’t a surprise as investors globally reach for income. The Federal Reserve has backstopped the “fallen angels,” allowing many high-yield (HY) companies to refinance at ever-lower rates and extend upcoming maturities for another day. Strong equity markets are forecasting an earnings rebound, and the vaccines will bring brighter days soon. We continue to find attractive values in the short/intermediate portion of the high-quality HY market.\nWe want to share a recent academic study with you regarding the risk and returns in the HY bond market: George Mason Universityrecently publisheda report on HY bond-fund returns and volatility relative to equities (S&P 500). Since 1990, the average HY bond fund has delivered average annualized returns of 7.1% with a volatility of 7.7%. Over the same time period, the S&P 500 delivered an average annualized return of 7.8%, but with almost double the volatility of 14.5%. The conclusion: HY bonds have paid total returns near those of the U.S. stock market with half of the volatility. We believe the HY market will offer competitive returns in the decade ahead, as equity valuations have risen and Treasury yields have plummeted. Our ability to utilize busted convertibles, preferreds, and special-situation income investments enhances our cash-flow opportunities.\n—Jason R. Graybill, Neil D. Klein\nEmerging Markets Blast Off\nPCM Report\nPeak Capital Management\npcmstrategies.com\nFeb. 1: So far, 2021 has been a good year for emerging-market equities. Year to date, theiShares MSCI Emerging Marketsexchange-traded fund (EEM) is higher by roughly 8%, compared to a gain of approximately 3% for theSPDR S&P 500ETF (SPY). Ever since the financial crisis of 2008, emerging markets collectively have woefully lagged U.S. equities.\nWhat could propel the asset class higher in 20201 and beyond? In the long term, the likely catalyst is demographics. Developed markets such as the U.S. and Europe have aging populations, which could suggest lower productivity and gross-domestic-product growth over the next decade compared to emerging-market economies.\nIn its most recent capital-markets report, JPMorgan projected GDP growth across emerging markets to be 3.9% in 2021, compared to 1.6% across developed markets. The report suggests China and India will drive GDP growth, and emerging markets’ productivity and human capital will gradually converge to developed-market levels.\n—Clint Pekrul","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":141,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":317058814,"gmtCreate":1612400829238,"gmtModify":1704870646932,"author":{"id":"3556666999577875","authorId":"3556666999577875","name":"RotiPlanta","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/26c30c2f9324312c5289e239352652be","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3556666999577875","authorIdStr":"3556666999577875"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/317058814","repostId":"1172180017","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1172180017","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612338041,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1172180017?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-03 15:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"As GameStop showed, anyone can manipulate the market. Here's how to fix that","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1172180017","media":"straitstimes","summary":"NEW YORK (NYTIMES) - There will be academic case studies on the mania around GameStop's stock. There","content":"<p>NEW YORK (NYTIMES) - There will be academic case studies on the mania around GameStop's stock. There will be philosophical debates about whether this was a genuine protest against hedge funds and inequality or a pump-and-dump scheme masquerading as a moral crusade. Eventually, we will learn whether this was a transformational moment powered by social media that will shift the investing landscape forever, or a short-term blip that soon fades away.</p>\n<p>What is less up for debate is this: The public has a deep distrust of the stock market and everything it represents. That lesson has been laid bare by the anger coursing through the Reddit posts and Twitter threads of GameStop traders and the throngs cheering them on.</p>\n<p>What the Reddit investors did,more than anything else, was demonstrate in the starkest terms that they could manipulate the market in the way that so much of the public believes hedge funds and wealthy investors do every day. In doing so, they exposed the fallacy that the stock market was ever a level playing field.</p>\n<p>So now what? If any good can come from this beyond the feel-good story of some retail traders profiting at the expense of hedge funds - which may reverse before this story is over - it requires a real conversation about how to make a more fair market that nobody can manipulate, that provides the same opportunities for everyone to create wealth.</p>\n<p>Here are policy ideas to help level the playing field:</p>\n<p><b>• A transaction tax for high-frequency traders</b></p>\n<p>One of the arguments repeatedly made by critics of Wall Street is that high-frequency traders - who are buying and selling in milliseconds - have made a mockery of the idea of actual investing. These traders are often taking advantage of price discrepancies using algorithms in a way that no retail investor has any opportunity to do, creating great wealth at firms like Citadel and Virtu Financial. A transaction tax of even 0.1 per cent on the value of trades would not only raise nearly $80 billion a year, but also meaningfully reduce high-frequency trading by making it less profitable. Bills have been proposed in Congress repeatedly for such a tax and struck down.</p>\n<p>The cons: Proponents of high-frequency trading say that it creates more competition and therefore makes the market more efficient for all participants, including retail investors.</p>\n<p><b>• Disclosure of short positions</b></p>\n<p>Big hedge funds have to disclose their \"long\" positions when they cross the threshold of owning 5 per cent or more of a company's shares. No such disclosure is required for short positions. At all. Shouldn't there be? If we as a society believe transparency is important to understand who is buying up shares, it would seem logical that we also want to know who is betting against them. Some people believe that short selling itself should banned, but others believe it performs an important policing function by incentivising shareholders to scrutinise companies for fraud, chicanery or simple mismanagement.</p>\n<p>The cons: If short-sellers were forced to disclose their bets, they could find it difficult to build meaningful positions. Shorting a stock can take time, and building the position could make them targets of investors who might put them in a short squeeze, similar to what was play out over the past week.</p>\n<p><b>• End private meetings between companies and big investors</b></p>\n<p>Passing important information that is not publicly disclosed to all investors is illegal. But big investors travel across the country constantly to visit chief executives and privately grill them about their businesses. The retail investor cannot get in these meetings. While most executives are careful not to pass news of impending earnings or a merger, it is hard to believe that big investors would spend the time and money to get these meetings if they did not believe that doing so provided them with an edge that they could not get otherwise.</p>\n<p>The cons: Companies often say they want to hear from their biggest investors and get feedback on their performance. Some big investors also say that given the amount of money at stake - especially when making a long-term investment commitment - they want to know the management team personally.</p>\n<p><b>• Access to private investments for anyone with smarts, not wealth</b></p>\n<p>The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) says that only \"accredited investors\" can put money in private investment vehicles like venture capital and private equity funds, which often generate some of the biggest returns. Historically, being an accredited investor was measured by wealth. The SEC recently changed the rule to allow people with deep financial experience to invest even if they don't meet the wealth thresholds. What about a test for anyone who wants to become an accredited investor, like a driver's licence for investing? This would create a fairer system and ensure anybody putting money in the most risky vehicles has the required financial literacy to fully understand the risks.</p>\n<p>The cons: Even the most sophisticated investors lose sometimes, but someone with a lot of wealth has a cushion. Someone with less to lose may be forced to rely on the social safety net when an investment goes wrong. And a financial literacy test for everyone might mean some of the wealthiest investors won't take - or pass - the exam, preventing money from being invested in risky but important early-stage companies.</p>\n<p><b>• End payment for order flow</b></p>\n<p>When Robinhood, the brokerage app, was introduced, its biggest innovation was eliminating trading commissions. The move was a huge hit, and the company grew so quickly that other brokerage firms eliminated their fees too. So how does it make money? Robinhood's unique insight was that it could charge market makers to execute trades for it. Market makers, in turn, extract a profit for fulfilling each trade and insights from the flood of data. In the case of Robinhood, Citadel Securities executes a majority of its trades and represents its biggest source of revenue. That has created questions about conflicts of interest and instilled a sense of distrust in the system. Ending the practice could give retail investors more confidence that the prices of their trades reflect prevailing conditions on exchanges and not private arrangements between brokers and other parties.</p>\n<p>The cons: This is a big one - trades would not be free. If you believe that no-commission trading has helped democratise the market and made it more accessible for retail investors, then eliminating it would make the playing field less equal.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>As GameStop showed, anyone can manipulate the market. Here's how to fix that</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAs GameStop showed, anyone can manipulate the market. Here's how to fix that\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-03 15:40 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/as-gamestop-showed-anyone-can-manipulate-the-market-heres-how-to-fix-that><strong>straitstimes</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>NEW YORK (NYTIMES) - There will be academic case studies on the mania around GameStop's stock. There will be philosophical debates about whether this was a genuine protest against hedge funds and ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/as-gamestop-showed-anyone-can-manipulate-the-market-heres-how-to-fix-that\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3780c78c8bb55dbf0b4bcd80ffe89707","relate_stocks":{"GME":"游戏驿站"},"source_url":"https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/as-gamestop-showed-anyone-can-manipulate-the-market-heres-how-to-fix-that","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1172180017","content_text":"NEW YORK (NYTIMES) - There will be academic case studies on the mania around GameStop's stock. There will be philosophical debates about whether this was a genuine protest against hedge funds and inequality or a pump-and-dump scheme masquerading as a moral crusade. Eventually, we will learn whether this was a transformational moment powered by social media that will shift the investing landscape forever, or a short-term blip that soon fades away.\nWhat is less up for debate is this: The public has a deep distrust of the stock market and everything it represents. That lesson has been laid bare by the anger coursing through the Reddit posts and Twitter threads of GameStop traders and the throngs cheering them on.\nWhat the Reddit investors did,more than anything else, was demonstrate in the starkest terms that they could manipulate the market in the way that so much of the public believes hedge funds and wealthy investors do every day. In doing so, they exposed the fallacy that the stock market was ever a level playing field.\nSo now what? If any good can come from this beyond the feel-good story of some retail traders profiting at the expense of hedge funds - which may reverse before this story is over - it requires a real conversation about how to make a more fair market that nobody can manipulate, that provides the same opportunities for everyone to create wealth.\nHere are policy ideas to help level the playing field:\n• A transaction tax for high-frequency traders\nOne of the arguments repeatedly made by critics of Wall Street is that high-frequency traders - who are buying and selling in milliseconds - have made a mockery of the idea of actual investing. These traders are often taking advantage of price discrepancies using algorithms in a way that no retail investor has any opportunity to do, creating great wealth at firms like Citadel and Virtu Financial. A transaction tax of even 0.1 per cent on the value of trades would not only raise nearly $80 billion a year, but also meaningfully reduce high-frequency trading by making it less profitable. Bills have been proposed in Congress repeatedly for such a tax and struck down.\nThe cons: Proponents of high-frequency trading say that it creates more competition and therefore makes the market more efficient for all participants, including retail investors.\n• Disclosure of short positions\nBig hedge funds have to disclose their \"long\" positions when they cross the threshold of owning 5 per cent or more of a company's shares. No such disclosure is required for short positions. At all. Shouldn't there be? If we as a society believe transparency is important to understand who is buying up shares, it would seem logical that we also want to know who is betting against them. Some people believe that short selling itself should banned, but others believe it performs an important policing function by incentivising shareholders to scrutinise companies for fraud, chicanery or simple mismanagement.\nThe cons: If short-sellers were forced to disclose their bets, they could find it difficult to build meaningful positions. Shorting a stock can take time, and building the position could make them targets of investors who might put them in a short squeeze, similar to what was play out over the past week.\n• End private meetings between companies and big investors\nPassing important information that is not publicly disclosed to all investors is illegal. But big investors travel across the country constantly to visit chief executives and privately grill them about their businesses. The retail investor cannot get in these meetings. While most executives are careful not to pass news of impending earnings or a merger, it is hard to believe that big investors would spend the time and money to get these meetings if they did not believe that doing so provided them with an edge that they could not get otherwise.\nThe cons: Companies often say they want to hear from their biggest investors and get feedback on their performance. Some big investors also say that given the amount of money at stake - especially when making a long-term investment commitment - they want to know the management team personally.\n• Access to private investments for anyone with smarts, not wealth\nThe United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) says that only \"accredited investors\" can put money in private investment vehicles like venture capital and private equity funds, which often generate some of the biggest returns. Historically, being an accredited investor was measured by wealth. The SEC recently changed the rule to allow people with deep financial experience to invest even if they don't meet the wealth thresholds. What about a test for anyone who wants to become an accredited investor, like a driver's licence for investing? This would create a fairer system and ensure anybody putting money in the most risky vehicles has the required financial literacy to fully understand the risks.\nThe cons: Even the most sophisticated investors lose sometimes, but someone with a lot of wealth has a cushion. Someone with less to lose may be forced to rely on the social safety net when an investment goes wrong. And a financial literacy test for everyone might mean some of the wealthiest investors won't take - or pass - the exam, preventing money from being invested in risky but important early-stage companies.\n• End payment for order flow\nWhen Robinhood, the brokerage app, was introduced, its biggest innovation was eliminating trading commissions. The move was a huge hit, and the company grew so quickly that other brokerage firms eliminated their fees too. So how does it make money? Robinhood's unique insight was that it could charge market makers to execute trades for it. Market makers, in turn, extract a profit for fulfilling each trade and insights from the flood of data. In the case of Robinhood, Citadel Securities executes a majority of its trades and represents its biggest source of revenue. That has created questions about conflicts of interest and instilled a sense of distrust in the system. Ending the practice could give retail investors more confidence that the prices of their trades reflect prevailing conditions on exchanges and not private arrangements between brokers and other parties.\nThe cons: This is a big one - trades would not be free. If you believe that no-commission trading has helped democratise the market and made it more accessible for retail investors, then eliminating it would make the playing field less equal.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":113,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":383925486,"gmtCreate":1612831974645,"gmtModify":1704874724773,"author":{"id":"3556666999577875","authorId":"3556666999577875","name":"RotiPlanta","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/26c30c2f9324312c5289e239352652be","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3556666999577875","authorIdStr":"3556666999577875"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"?","listText":"?","text":"?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/383925486","repostId":"1195153829","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":141,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":317058814,"gmtCreate":1612400829238,"gmtModify":1704870646932,"author":{"id":"3556666999577875","authorId":"3556666999577875","name":"RotiPlanta","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/26c30c2f9324312c5289e239352652be","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3556666999577875","authorIdStr":"3556666999577875"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/317058814","repostId":"1172180017","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1172180017","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1612338041,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1172180017?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-03 15:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"As GameStop showed, anyone can manipulate the market. Here's how to fix that","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1172180017","media":"straitstimes","summary":"NEW YORK (NYTIMES) - There will be academic case studies on the mania around GameStop's stock. There","content":"<p>NEW YORK (NYTIMES) - There will be academic case studies on the mania around GameStop's stock. There will be philosophical debates about whether this was a genuine protest against hedge funds and inequality or a pump-and-dump scheme masquerading as a moral crusade. Eventually, we will learn whether this was a transformational moment powered by social media that will shift the investing landscape forever, or a short-term blip that soon fades away.</p>\n<p>What is less up for debate is this: The public has a deep distrust of the stock market and everything it represents. That lesson has been laid bare by the anger coursing through the Reddit posts and Twitter threads of GameStop traders and the throngs cheering them on.</p>\n<p>What the Reddit investors did,more than anything else, was demonstrate in the starkest terms that they could manipulate the market in the way that so much of the public believes hedge funds and wealthy investors do every day. In doing so, they exposed the fallacy that the stock market was ever a level playing field.</p>\n<p>So now what? If any good can come from this beyond the feel-good story of some retail traders profiting at the expense of hedge funds - which may reverse before this story is over - it requires a real conversation about how to make a more fair market that nobody can manipulate, that provides the same opportunities for everyone to create wealth.</p>\n<p>Here are policy ideas to help level the playing field:</p>\n<p><b>• A transaction tax for high-frequency traders</b></p>\n<p>One of the arguments repeatedly made by critics of Wall Street is that high-frequency traders - who are buying and selling in milliseconds - have made a mockery of the idea of actual investing. These traders are often taking advantage of price discrepancies using algorithms in a way that no retail investor has any opportunity to do, creating great wealth at firms like Citadel and Virtu Financial. A transaction tax of even 0.1 per cent on the value of trades would not only raise nearly $80 billion a year, but also meaningfully reduce high-frequency trading by making it less profitable. Bills have been proposed in Congress repeatedly for such a tax and struck down.</p>\n<p>The cons: Proponents of high-frequency trading say that it creates more competition and therefore makes the market more efficient for all participants, including retail investors.</p>\n<p><b>• Disclosure of short positions</b></p>\n<p>Big hedge funds have to disclose their \"long\" positions when they cross the threshold of owning 5 per cent or more of a company's shares. No such disclosure is required for short positions. At all. Shouldn't there be? If we as a society believe transparency is important to understand who is buying up shares, it would seem logical that we also want to know who is betting against them. Some people believe that short selling itself should banned, but others believe it performs an important policing function by incentivising shareholders to scrutinise companies for fraud, chicanery or simple mismanagement.</p>\n<p>The cons: If short-sellers were forced to disclose their bets, they could find it difficult to build meaningful positions. Shorting a stock can take time, and building the position could make them targets of investors who might put them in a short squeeze, similar to what was play out over the past week.</p>\n<p><b>• End private meetings between companies and big investors</b></p>\n<p>Passing important information that is not publicly disclosed to all investors is illegal. But big investors travel across the country constantly to visit chief executives and privately grill them about their businesses. The retail investor cannot get in these meetings. While most executives are careful not to pass news of impending earnings or a merger, it is hard to believe that big investors would spend the time and money to get these meetings if they did not believe that doing so provided them with an edge that they could not get otherwise.</p>\n<p>The cons: Companies often say they want to hear from their biggest investors and get feedback on their performance. Some big investors also say that given the amount of money at stake - especially when making a long-term investment commitment - they want to know the management team personally.</p>\n<p><b>• Access to private investments for anyone with smarts, not wealth</b></p>\n<p>The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) says that only \"accredited investors\" can put money in private investment vehicles like venture capital and private equity funds, which often generate some of the biggest returns. Historically, being an accredited investor was measured by wealth. The SEC recently changed the rule to allow people with deep financial experience to invest even if they don't meet the wealth thresholds. What about a test for anyone who wants to become an accredited investor, like a driver's licence for investing? This would create a fairer system and ensure anybody putting money in the most risky vehicles has the required financial literacy to fully understand the risks.</p>\n<p>The cons: Even the most sophisticated investors lose sometimes, but someone with a lot of wealth has a cushion. Someone with less to lose may be forced to rely on the social safety net when an investment goes wrong. And a financial literacy test for everyone might mean some of the wealthiest investors won't take - or pass - the exam, preventing money from being invested in risky but important early-stage companies.</p>\n<p><b>• End payment for order flow</b></p>\n<p>When Robinhood, the brokerage app, was introduced, its biggest innovation was eliminating trading commissions. The move was a huge hit, and the company grew so quickly that other brokerage firms eliminated their fees too. So how does it make money? Robinhood's unique insight was that it could charge market makers to execute trades for it. Market makers, in turn, extract a profit for fulfilling each trade and insights from the flood of data. In the case of Robinhood, Citadel Securities executes a majority of its trades and represents its biggest source of revenue. That has created questions about conflicts of interest and instilled a sense of distrust in the system. Ending the practice could give retail investors more confidence that the prices of their trades reflect prevailing conditions on exchanges and not private arrangements between brokers and other parties.</p>\n<p>The cons: This is a big one - trades would not be free. If you believe that no-commission trading has helped democratise the market and made it more accessible for retail investors, then eliminating it would make the playing field less equal.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>As GameStop showed, anyone can manipulate the market. Here's how to fix that</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAs GameStop showed, anyone can manipulate the market. Here's how to fix that\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-03 15:40 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/as-gamestop-showed-anyone-can-manipulate-the-market-heres-how-to-fix-that><strong>straitstimes</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>NEW YORK (NYTIMES) - There will be academic case studies on the mania around GameStop's stock. There will be philosophical debates about whether this was a genuine protest against hedge funds and ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/as-gamestop-showed-anyone-can-manipulate-the-market-heres-how-to-fix-that\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3780c78c8bb55dbf0b4bcd80ffe89707","relate_stocks":{"GME":"游戏驿站"},"source_url":"https://www.straitstimes.com/business/companies-markets/as-gamestop-showed-anyone-can-manipulate-the-market-heres-how-to-fix-that","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1172180017","content_text":"NEW YORK (NYTIMES) - There will be academic case studies on the mania around GameStop's stock. There will be philosophical debates about whether this was a genuine protest against hedge funds and inequality or a pump-and-dump scheme masquerading as a moral crusade. Eventually, we will learn whether this was a transformational moment powered by social media that will shift the investing landscape forever, or a short-term blip that soon fades away.\nWhat is less up for debate is this: The public has a deep distrust of the stock market and everything it represents. That lesson has been laid bare by the anger coursing through the Reddit posts and Twitter threads of GameStop traders and the throngs cheering them on.\nWhat the Reddit investors did,more than anything else, was demonstrate in the starkest terms that they could manipulate the market in the way that so much of the public believes hedge funds and wealthy investors do every day. In doing so, they exposed the fallacy that the stock market was ever a level playing field.\nSo now what? If any good can come from this beyond the feel-good story of some retail traders profiting at the expense of hedge funds - which may reverse before this story is over - it requires a real conversation about how to make a more fair market that nobody can manipulate, that provides the same opportunities for everyone to create wealth.\nHere are policy ideas to help level the playing field:\n• A transaction tax for high-frequency traders\nOne of the arguments repeatedly made by critics of Wall Street is that high-frequency traders - who are buying and selling in milliseconds - have made a mockery of the idea of actual investing. These traders are often taking advantage of price discrepancies using algorithms in a way that no retail investor has any opportunity to do, creating great wealth at firms like Citadel and Virtu Financial. A transaction tax of even 0.1 per cent on the value of trades would not only raise nearly $80 billion a year, but also meaningfully reduce high-frequency trading by making it less profitable. Bills have been proposed in Congress repeatedly for such a tax and struck down.\nThe cons: Proponents of high-frequency trading say that it creates more competition and therefore makes the market more efficient for all participants, including retail investors.\n• Disclosure of short positions\nBig hedge funds have to disclose their \"long\" positions when they cross the threshold of owning 5 per cent or more of a company's shares. No such disclosure is required for short positions. At all. Shouldn't there be? If we as a society believe transparency is important to understand who is buying up shares, it would seem logical that we also want to know who is betting against them. Some people believe that short selling itself should banned, but others believe it performs an important policing function by incentivising shareholders to scrutinise companies for fraud, chicanery or simple mismanagement.\nThe cons: If short-sellers were forced to disclose their bets, they could find it difficult to build meaningful positions. Shorting a stock can take time, and building the position could make them targets of investors who might put them in a short squeeze, similar to what was play out over the past week.\n• End private meetings between companies and big investors\nPassing important information that is not publicly disclosed to all investors is illegal. But big investors travel across the country constantly to visit chief executives and privately grill them about their businesses. The retail investor cannot get in these meetings. While most executives are careful not to pass news of impending earnings or a merger, it is hard to believe that big investors would spend the time and money to get these meetings if they did not believe that doing so provided them with an edge that they could not get otherwise.\nThe cons: Companies often say they want to hear from their biggest investors and get feedback on their performance. Some big investors also say that given the amount of money at stake - especially when making a long-term investment commitment - they want to know the management team personally.\n• Access to private investments for anyone with smarts, not wealth\nThe United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) says that only \"accredited investors\" can put money in private investment vehicles like venture capital and private equity funds, which often generate some of the biggest returns. Historically, being an accredited investor was measured by wealth. The SEC recently changed the rule to allow people with deep financial experience to invest even if they don't meet the wealth thresholds. What about a test for anyone who wants to become an accredited investor, like a driver's licence for investing? This would create a fairer system and ensure anybody putting money in the most risky vehicles has the required financial literacy to fully understand the risks.\nThe cons: Even the most sophisticated investors lose sometimes, but someone with a lot of wealth has a cushion. Someone with less to lose may be forced to rely on the social safety net when an investment goes wrong. And a financial literacy test for everyone might mean some of the wealthiest investors won't take - or pass - the exam, preventing money from being invested in risky but important early-stage companies.\n• End payment for order flow\nWhen Robinhood, the brokerage app, was introduced, its biggest innovation was eliminating trading commissions. The move was a huge hit, and the company grew so quickly that other brokerage firms eliminated their fees too. So how does it make money? Robinhood's unique insight was that it could charge market makers to execute trades for it. Market makers, in turn, extract a profit for fulfilling each trade and insights from the flood of data. In the case of Robinhood, Citadel Securities executes a majority of its trades and represents its biggest source of revenue. That has created questions about conflicts of interest and instilled a sense of distrust in the system. Ending the practice could give retail investors more confidence that the prices of their trades reflect prevailing conditions on exchanges and not private arrangements between brokers and other parties.\nThe cons: This is a big one - trades would not be free. If you believe that no-commission trading has helped democratise the market and made it more accessible for retail investors, then eliminating it would make the playing field less equal.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":113,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}
