vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
&gt; It seems like another way to have more artificial leverage in the future market, without having to borrow any money.   Leverage is plentiful in the futures markets, and without borrowing.  &gt; Why aren't future options talked about more?   Because they don't as easily connect to predictions that people mean to make. Because they have worse pricing because people are paying more along the way. Because they lack volume.  But they're talked about and used plenty. There's not much to them that there isn't to equity options at a low level.  &gt; It seems like a safer way to play commodities compared to just futures.  You mean hedging your futures contracts? Yes, the people who want to do that buy options.
I don't think any open source trading project is going to offer trial or demo accounts. In fact, I'm not clear on what you mean by this. Are you looking for some example data sets so you can see how your algorithm would perform historically? If you contact whatever specific brokers that you'd like to interface with, they can provide things like connection tests, etc., but no one is going to let you do live trades on a trial or demo basis. For more information about setting this sort of thing up at home, here's a good link: < http://www.stat.cmu.edu/~abrock/algotrading/index.html >. It's not Python specific, but should give you a good idea of what to do.
"&gt; Is your time frame any longer than intraday? I imagine you wouldn't want to carry that risk overnight if you're a broker or selling a route..  Most brokers these days are executing in an agent capacity, so they're never holding the risk. They execute what they can, the customer keeps what they can't.   &gt; So, say for instance you join a bid a few levels down, you aren't really get filled, you start hitting the offer and eventually you realize you're competing with someone for the shares offered, so you take out the price level and bid on all the exchanges so that you're first on the bid at that level, then repeat until someone that can match your appetite starts to fill you on the bid?  Lifting* the offer (hit bids, lift offers). And I suppose that's a stategy, albeit a somewhat simple one. Passive routing strategies differ from firm to firm and algo to algo. What is your customer going to think if you bid up a new price level only for the stock to rally completely away from it?  &gt; Right, so say you need 100k shares, there are 10k offered at 9.98, 25k offered at 9.99, and 65k at 10.00, you might just enter an intermarket sweep order of 100k @ 10 limit and hope that you can get most of the shares off before everyone can cancel? I imagine there has to be a lot of bidding it up to attract sellers and then letting people take out your bids all day...  ""Bidding it up to attract sellers"" sounds an awful lot like [spoofing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoofing_(finance\)), just a heads up. Sure though, if you want to tighten a spread or create new levels with aggressive passive liquidity, that is a strategy. The same caveats as I mentioned above apply.  Anyway, if market impact isn't an issue for the customer, sure, take liquidity until you're filled. Don't forget about getting good size done in the opening and closing auctions (MOO/MOC). If you're too passive you risk the market moving away from you and pissing off the customer. If you're too aggressive you risk moving the market too much and pissing off the customer."
As Chris pointed out in his comment, smaller stock exchanges may use open outcry. There are several exchanges that use open outcry/floor trading in the US, however, although they aren't necessarily stock exchanges.  Having visited the three Chicago exchanges I mentioned, I can personally vouch for their continued use of a trading floor, although its use is declining in all three.
I work in financial tech, and we've been working on regulatory projects non stop since the middle of last year. Not a single feature enhancement for traders has been implemented despite very high demand.   The other (smaller) wing of the tech division has been working on electronic trading. As regulation and position transparency ramp up, voice spreads will fall and desks will have to rely on volume driven by electronic trading to make up revenue. The people driving this will be technology, and not the traders.   So: if you want to get in on the finances money, brush up on your programming skills: C++, Java, python are the bare minimum.
"I don't know why people ask these types of questions.  Do you have an interest in the business world?  Do you play the stock market, or do you at least follow some companies?  Do you read about hedge funds?  Do you read about algorithmic trading? If the answer is ""no"" to all of these, then consider something else.  I've seen too many people in the industry who are desperately unhappy because they have no interest in the industry, but are hooked on the money."
I used Oanda.com for Forex trading a couple years ago. I am in the US but I think it's available in the UK as well. At the time, they had no commissions and their spreads were comparable or better than other brokers. The spreads would just quite considerably when a big event like a Fed meeting or the unemployment figures come out, but I suspect that that is the same everywhere (or they have constant spreads and reject trades).  They did not push the high leverages like other brokers were at the time. I considered this to be very reputable, because though the profits to be gotten through 100:1 leverage are great advertising, the reality is that one unexpected spike and a newbie would lose a bunch of money in a margin call.
Which is what [flash trading](http://www.investopedia.com/financial-edge/0809/flash-trading-wall-streets-latest-scam.aspx) is for.   edit: I promise you, you could. You would just need a faster line. I promise that's why the NYSE banned it. However, that still doesn't mitigate the problem of creating your own exchange.
&gt; Are you saying that OP was just unlucky because he didn't realize that forex wasn't covered under SIPC?  Pretty much.  Opening an investing account has tons of T&amp;C.  You're not going to read every single bit of it.
(Yes, anybody can register a domain with a similar name and then acquire a basic SSL certificate for that domain.) FWIW, Scottrade and ShareBuilder are both legitimate brokers (I was aware already of each, but I also just checked in the FINRA tool), and the URLs currently linked to by the question are legitimate web site addresses for each. Also, you can see their EV certificates in action on secured pages here and here. As to whether your investments with those brokers would be ""safe"" in the event of the broker failing (e.g. goes bankrupt), you'll want to know that they are members of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (Wikipedia). (Of course, this kind of protection doesn't protect you if your investments simply go down in value.) But do your own due diligence – always."
"LOL. Its gotten harder for those who dont want to change with the times. Tools like sentdex and PsychSignal provide a solid argument against the headline of the article. Its not harder, the methods have just changed. Most people dont understand the methods and thus: ""its gotten harder.""  Harder is entirely relative, for people like me, its gotten easier...  [This algorithm looks for a high volume of bullish tweets about penny stocks and returns 95% in a year.](https://www.quantopian.com/posts/psychsignal-machine-learning-and-penny-stocks-95-percent-in-a-year)    [This algorithm trades my favorite tech stocks using tweets to determine when to buy. 140% 2016-mid 2017.](https://www.quantopian.com/posts/psychsignal-machine-learning-models-and-tech-stocks)   I will say that in those algorithms, I throw out more than half the data. To be more correct, I assume half the data is bullshit (people mindlessly reposting, morons talking about shit they dont understand, etc.)   People, in general, are idiots. The moment you accept this, social media analysis becomes rather easy.   In my first 3 weeks of trading ever I was up 60% because of Bio Med stocks (i lost it all due to greed, I now always pull out early (lol) as opposed to too late). I didn't know ANYTHING about the bio med market - I let stock twits do all the work (in general, Twitter is actually more correct than stocktwits, which is rather ironic). Once I started trading with algorithms, I automated this process.  Have real analysts been squashed by the short segments they get on TV? sure. but if you are really getting your info from TV, as opposed to just reading it in 1/10th of the time it takes to watch a TV program, thats your fault. These days I feel its best to do the research yourself, read about it online somewhere, or use the high volume of data available with algorithmic trading."
Funny.  I just made a comment about how I like that there is no commission.    There are 2 Best Buys near me that I shop at.  I always find the sales people to be helpful when I need their help.  Maybe some regions have better training methods?
"I tried to read a couple of articles, most are behind a paywall.  Hopefully you'll forgive me for thinking the whole page looked like a bunch of corporate propaganda- an entire page of ""here's why everyone is wrong about us"" with formatting from the early 2010s.   Maybe you can walk me through this.   You've got thousands of mathematicians and engineers who could be designing something useful instead spending time accomplishing nothing except for fractionally beating each other at trading ""paper"" assets.   Similarly you have construction crews that could be expanding internet capability, instead laying cable some guys can signal trades sooner than other guys.  The positions HFTs hold are so short, they can't possibly be benefiting from the actual overall change  in value of the underlying assets, which happens over the course of months, not microseconds.  So the only possible returns come from ""taking"" someone else's value.   I'm not making a moral judgement, here I'm pointing out that there's no net benefits to society."
A simple example - When looking at oil trading in different locations first I have some back of the envelop adjustments for the grade of oil, then look at storage costs (irrelevant in the case of electricity) and transport costs between two locations to see if physical players are actively arbing the spread.   No strong views on reading material in this specific area - Google, google scholar and amazon all have relevant material.  When it comes to your current problem, here are some questions to think about:  1. Is the power generated from the same commodity at location A and location W?   2. How has the spread changed in the past? Has trading location W actively hedged the worst cases of prices moves in location A?   3. Is it feasible to trade the commodity that location A generates the majority of its power from/how does that compare to electricity trading at location W as a hedge?  4. If hedging is really desirable, are you sure you can't do an illiquid over the counter hedge at location A? Paying a little bit more in the bid/ask for the hedge could be more desirable than trying to jump into a market you yourselves don't quite understand.  5. If your consultants come back with just some hedge ratios without discussing what drives the spreads between the two locations and where the spreads are currently be skeptical.
You can get this data from a variety of sources, but likely not all from 1 source.  Yahoo is a good source, as is Google, but some stock markets also give away some of this data, and there's foreign websites which provide data for foreign exchanges.    Some Googling is required, as is knowledge of web scraping (R, Python, Ruby or Perl are great tools for this...).
There is nothing called actual, unless you convert currency. There are real offer rates that are slightly different from Bank to Bank. Search Engines give a generic average value based on the sites they are trust / have tie-up with. Banks don't use google or search engines to get the basis, they have quite a bit more info and there is a specific Treasury function that would look at the trend and give out a huge spread between buy and sell.
"&gt;According to the article, I think the operative word is ""train,"" not ""push.""  Or ""gain job experience"".  &gt;Another thing that I did not see this article address is that there really is no loyalty within companies any more. Companies view people as a commodity (but yet don't believe in the free market principle surrounding a commodity), instead of treating people as a resource. **Hence people are ready to walk away when they spot a better opportunity.**  People shouldn't be viewed as *either* a ""resource"" (to be exploited) or as a ""commodity"" (to be sourced/discarded) -- rather any *intelligent and KNOWLEDGABLE manager* (basically meaning NOT an academically trained MBA type) will realize that he is building a TEAM, and that people ARE the business -- no factory, however ""automated"" will EVER run itself without at least SOME highly skilled people who know how the whole operation works (and where it *doesn't work* and needs watching/tweaking); and even more so with other businesses. Systematizing things is great, documenting processes is good, but none of those things can replace a solid person who knows the operation.  And, I have always LOL'ed at the irony of companies who want to ""hire from their competitors"" -- but then somehow believe that their competitors aren't going to do the same to them (and even want to cry ""foul"" when it does happen).  The idiocy... it's palpable.  ---  Likewise, as the author/speaker identifies with the ""applicant screening software"" built on top of what at least used to be called an ""expert system"" -- this reveals that crafting such a system is a LOT more difficult than many imagine (and the error is really in the ""requirements"" and specification than merely the programming), and that rather than an ""expert"" system, what you are more likely to end up with is an ""idiocy system"" that creates an even worse problem.  So anyone claiming a ""skills gap"" and that they cannot find good people (especially in THIS economy) -- is just proving themselves to be a prime example of a failure of management."
Unless you have the storage and transportation facilities for it, or can come up with the money needed to rent or build those, no -- or not in any significant quantity.  Buying oil futures is essentially an on-paper version of the same bet. Futures prices are already taking into account both expectations about price changes and the fact that there's cash tied up until they come due, but storage costs also adjust to follow those expectations.
Not directly an answer to your question, but somewhat related: There are derivatives (whose English name I sadly don't know) that allow to profit from breaking through an upper or alternatively a lower barrier. If the trade range does not hit either barrier you lose. This kind of derivative is useful if you expect a strong movement in either direction, which typically occurs at high volume.
Well the article did mention that if you continually beat your bookmaker you're likely to get rejected in future which is hilarious, but personally I have actually bet on sports and I've found that it's a fairly easy game to win at if you don't go for bets with huge odds and I don't think I've ever placed a bet where after I lost and said 'what the hell just happened'. I only really bet on rugby and soccer though, so team sports may be a bit less prone to corruption from the bookmakers. I'm not saying I think this is a safe way to do business though, I don't think day trading is either. I think they are both speculation. I just think that sports betting has a lot more for a speculator to work with before they develop a strategy. For instance, I always bet on New Zealand winning a rugby game, their players line up as the top in their respective positions and their game strategy essentially has the rules of the game exploited to the maximum. All of the data on this team based on their past performance is actually applicable to their future performance, skilled players usually continue to be so up till a certain age, skilled coaches who stay in their position mean no variation in team strategy. That makes me feel confident that even though New Zealand might lose a game here or there, that they will continue to be winners, and even though the gains on their wins aren't much, consistently winning with them over time builds up to a nice bit of profit. With day trading in the stock market, so much of the variation in prices is due to non accounting fundamentals, and even though historical data can be useful we know that investor sentiment, secret information, and a myriad of other factors mean that unless you are extremely experienced or have a natural eye for reading markets that most traders will lose. I know developing strategies do work for some people, but I think I've seen it said on this sub a couple times that 'trading strategies work - until they don't.' I only speak as a uni student who has limited research beyond Bloomberg articles etc... but from what I can tell, the majority of day traders lose money eventually, and even with AI, the profits are only noteable when the capital input is extremely high.
"&gt; i dont know who Amway is  [Multilevel marketing](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-level_marketing).  There will be some form of it in the UK (think Herbalife, but [here's a list of them](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_multi-level_marketing_companies)).    &gt; I dont even know what you're argueing?  To my original point:  You will not bootstrap your way to wealth and success simply by having more and more children.  What you will find online, however, are one-off examples of people who take advantage of a system in what is likely an illegal or unintended fashion to support a view you might already have (that view being ""you can birth your way to wealth and success"")."
"You have to register with the SEC as an Investment Company. The SEC has a ""Investment Company Regulation and Registration Package"", available here: http://www.sec.gov/divisions/investment/invcoreg121504.htm  I found that off their overall page for funds and advisors: http://www.sec.gov/divisions/investment.shtml  Finally, bear in mind that your state may have various requirements as well."
Sounds like you are starting an investment club. What you need is an investment club partnership agreement. Have a look at this free document. EDIT Based on OP's comments, it appears that the OP will be acting as an adviser/manager of a private investment fund. If the fund is not open to the public, it may still be treated as a type of investment club, but different rules -- including possibly having to register with the SEC -- may apply (quoted from the first link): If the adviser is compensated for providing the advice regarding the club's investments, the adviser may need to register according to the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Also, if one person selects investments for the club, that person may have to register as an investment adviser. In general, a person who has $25 million or more in assets under management is required to register with the SEC under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. A person managing less than $25 million may be required to register under the securities laws of the state or states in which the adviser transacts business.
No, there is no minimum employee limit in order for a company to initiate an initial public offering.
"The (U.S) ""accredited investor"" laws apply to investments in the U.S. Foreign countries may or may not have their own laws regarding investment in startups, and if so, the foreign laws apply. One way around the net worth minimum is to be a member of the management team. ""Active"" (management) investors don't need to be accredited because they can see what's going on on a day to day basis. The accredited investor laws apply to the target companies, not to the investors. Basically, a start-up company can't take ""other people's money"" from a non-accredited investor. But you can invest ""your own"" money in it if you are a manager."
Not sure if your question is on topic, but the investment is only $9 because that is maximum amount of money the merchant ever needed to start up the business. He put in $9, started turning a profit, and never looked back.
"Thanks.  This is super simplified as I said.  It gets much deeper when you start looking at costs of capital, country risk premiums (for projects in emerging markets), ""risk free rate of return"" (putting cash in guaranteed returns such as a us treasury note), mutually exclusive projects, etc.  But the basic concept is... what is the minimum required return on a project to justify choosing to pursue it.  If you borrow money via loan at 10%, your required rate of return on whatever project you invest it in has to be at least that 10%.  Otherwise you're better off just not doing anything."
"For the really big money, you've missed the boat. Most will have MSc's in finance by now; which, even in my day 20 years ago, was a minimum entry requirement.  There's a well known book of questions that used to get asked in interviews called ""Heard on the Street"". It'll let you know whether you can cut it on the floor or you're better off in middle or back office. It's very old but typical of the understanding and mind type you need.  Investment management should be a possible. It's a totally different pace of life.  If you're talking accounting, you'll be fine!"
I can't give you a detailed answer because I'm away from the computer where I use kMyMoney, but IIRC to add investments you have to create new transactions on the 'brokerage account' linked to your investment account.
So you want to make deposits when pb>pi, or s*(ri^n-1)/(ri-1) - b > s*(rb^n-1)/(rb-1) Then just solve for n and you're done! Except ... maybe someone who's better at algebra than me could solve that for n, but I don't see how to do it. Further complicating this is that banks normally pay interest monthly, while stocks go up or down every day. If a calculation said to withdraw after 3.9 months, it might really be better to wait for 4.0 months to collect one additional month's interest. But let's see if we can approximate. If the growth rates and the number of periods are relatively small, the compounding of growth should also be relatively small. So an approximate solution would be when the difference between the interest rates, times the amount of each deposit, summed over the number of deposits, is greater than the fee. That is, say the investment pays 10% per month more than your bank account (wildly optimistic but just for example), the broker fee is $10, and the amount of each deposit is $200. Then if you delay making the investment by one month you're losing 10% of $200 = $20. This is more than the broker fee, so you should invest immediately. Okay, suppose more realistically that the investment pays 1% more per month than the bank account. Then the first month you're losing 1% of $200 = $2. The second month you have $400 in the bank, so you're losing $4, total loss for two months = $6. The third month you have $600 in the bank so you lose an additional $6, total loss = $12. Etc. So you should transfer the money to the investment about the third month. Compounding would mean that losses on transferring to the investment are a little higher than this, so you'd want to bias to transferring a little earlier. Or, you could set up a spreadsheet to do the compounding calculations month by month, and then just look down the column for when the investment total minus the bank total is greater than the broker fee.