vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
For example: if you invest $10 in Microsoft, and on the day of execution eToro’s average aggregated price was $30 after a spread of 0.1%, you will then have a CFD representing 0.33 stocks of Microsoft in your eToro account. In addition, with eToro you can invest in stock in the context of a social trading network, meaning that you can utilize the stock trading expertise of other trader to your advantage by following them, learning their strategies, and even copying their stock investments automatically. To put it briefly, you won’t be facing the stock market alone! Before you make a decision, I suggest that you try stock trading with an eToro demo account. A free demo account grants you access to all our instruments at real market rates, as well as access to our social network where you can view and participate in trader discussions about trading stocks with eToro, all without risking your hard earned money. Bottom line – it’s free, there are no strings attached, and you can get a much firmer idea of what trading stocks with eToro is like. If you have any further questions, please don’t hesitate to contact us through our site: www.etoro.com.
Imagine that a fund had a large exit load that declined over several years. If you wanted to sell some or all of your investment in that fund you would face a large fee, unless you held it a long time. You would be hesitant to sell because waiting longer would save you money. That is the exact opposite of a liquid investment.  Therefore the ideal level for a liquid fund is to have zero exit load.
I use the following allocation in my retirement portfolio: I prefer these because: Expense Ratios Oh, and by their very definition, ETFs are very liquid. EDIT: The remaining 10% is the speculative portion of my portfolio. Currently, I own shares in HAP (as a hedge against rising commodity prices) and TIP (as a hedge against hyperinflation).
I disagree strongly with the other two answers posted thus far. HFT are not just liquidity providers (in fact that claim is completely bogus, considering liquidity evaporates whenever the market is falling). HFT are not just scalping for pennies, they are also trading based on trends and news releases. So you end up having imperfect algorithms, not humans, deciding the price of almost every security being traded. These algorithms data mine for news releases or they look for and make correlations, even when none exist.  The result is that every asset traded using HFT is mispriced. This happens in a variety of ways. Algos will react to the same news event if it has multiple sources (Ive seen stocks soar when week old news was re-released), algos will react to fake news posted on Twitter, and algos will correlate S&P to other indexes such as VIX or currencies. About 2 years ago the S&P was strongly correlated with EURJPY. In other words, the American stock market was completely dependent on the exchange rate of two currencies on completely different continents. In other words, no one knows the true value of stocks anymore because the free market hasnt existed in over 5 years.
The data for ES_F normally is joined on the contract expiry date, i.e. june is joined to the next month on the expiry date.  The discrepancy to the real thing in practice might be significant, as seasonal strategies (as we call these) are mined fairly often.
"A huge amount of money in all financial markets is from institutional investors, such as mutual funds, government pension plans, sovereign wealth funds, etc.  For various reasons these funds do all of their trading at the end of the day.  They care primarily that their end-of-day balances are in line with their targets and are easy to audit and far less about ""timing the market"" for the best possible trades. So, if you're looking at a stock that is owned by many institutional investors -- such as a stock (like AAPL) that makes up a significant portion of an index that many funds track -- there will be a huge amount of activity at this time relative to stocks that are less popular among institutions. Even just in its introduction this paper (PDF) gives a fair overview of other reasons why there's a lot of trading at end-of-day in general. (In fact, because of all this closing activity and the reliance on end-of-day prices as signposts for financial calculations, the end-of-day has for decades been the single most fraud-ridden time of the trading day.  Electronic trading has done away with a lot of the straight-up thievery that floor traders and brokers used to get away with at the expense of the public, but it still exists.  See, for example, any explanation of the term banging the close, or the penalties against 6 banks just last month for manipulating the FX market at the close.)"
Don't know the name but it means you're long with conviction :P  Unlimited gains, maximum loss of 95$  + (8-6) = 97$.  Basically You are long @ 107  - -2 from 105 to 95.  You would have to be ULTRA bullish to initiate this strategy.
Pretty big difference between the “over valued” stock of the dot com crash (more akin to ICO’s in that they’d have an idea and IPO for $60mm withoutany real viable business or assets) and the “over valued” stock Einhorn is rambling against today (short Amazon, which clearly has a functioning business with tangible assets)
"For a retail investor who isn't a Physics or Math major, the ""Beta"" of the stock is probably the best way to quantify risk.  Examples: A Beta of 1 means that a stock moves in line with the market. Over 1 means that you would expect the stock to move up or down faster than the market as a whole. Under 1 means that you would expect the stock to move slower than the market as a whole."
Material Information means that any information that can reasonable affect the share price of the company [upward or downward] as looked by the investors. The idea is to provide a level playing field to all investors. Hence it forces people having material information not to trade when they have this information that is not yet disclosed. Yes it happens all the time and laws are quite stringent. There is monitoring of share activity by regulators ... hence most of the times the companies come out with their own guidelines and top & senior management is prohibited from trading in their own company’s shares for pretty much round the year except few windows the company decides is safe. Now it may not be possible to monitor every small material info, but any large spike of stocks after certain announcements is investigated by regulators to verify any undue gains. For ex a person who never trades suddenly buys large qty of shares and it goes up and he sells again ... etc
Hedge funds are typically just funds structured and operated in a way that make them exempt from various securities regulations, most notably the Investment Company Act of 1940 and the Investment Advisers Act of 1940.  This allows them to operate freely of restrictions on traditional fund such as those related to management compensation, public disclosures, investor liquidity, and portfolio concentration and use of leverage.  In order to achieve this, hedge funds are typically open only to a limited number of wealthy or sophisticated investors and are restricted in how and to whom they can advertise.
In the commodity markets, Southwest Airlines used derivatives (options to buy at a fixed price in the future) on fuel to hedge against increases in fuel prices for years. This way, they added predictability to their cost structure and were able to beat the competition when fuel prices rose. Even had fuel prices dropped to zero, their exposure was limited to the pre-negotiated price of the fuel, which they'd already planned for. On the other hand, if you start doing things like selling uncovered calls, you expose yourself to potentially infinite losses, since there are no caps on how high the price of a stock can go. So it's not possible to say that derivatives as a class of investment are risky per se, because they can be used to reduce risk. I would take hedge funds, as a class, out of your list. You can't generally invest in those unless you have quite a lot of money, and they use strategies that vary widely, many of which are quite risky.
Consider the mechanic which actually drives the 'price' of a stock. In simplest terms, the 'price' of a stock is the price at which the most recent trade occurred. ie: if the price of IBM is $100/share, that means the last time someone bought IBM stock, they paid $100. Above and below the 'spot price', are dozens/hundreds/thousands of buyers and sellers who have placed orders that no one is yet willing to match. ie: if IBM's spot price is at $100, there could still be 10,000 people willing to sell for $101 (called the 'ask' price, for the lowest price someone is currently willing to sell at), and 15,000 willing to buy for $99 (called the 'bid' price, for the highest price someone is currently willing to buy for).  Until someone is willing to buy for $101, then no one will be able to sell at $101. Until someone is willing to sell for $99, no one will be able to buy for $99. Typically orders are placed in the market at a particular limit. Meaning that those orders to buy at $99/sell at $101 are already in the 'system', and will be matched immediately as soon as someone is willing to meet the price on the other side. Now consider general market economics: high demand drives up price, and high supply drives down price. If the details above for IBM were yesterday, and today some news came out that IBM was laying off employees, imagine that another 10,000 people who held shares wanted to sell. Now there would be 20,000 sellers and only 15,000 buyers. If those new sellers were aggressive about wanting to sell, they would have to drop their price to $99, to match the highest buyers in the market. Put together, this means that as more sellers enter the market, supply of shares increases, driving down price. Conversely, as more buyers enter the market, demand for shares increases, driving up share price. As a result of the above, you can say that (all else being equal) if price for a stock goes up, there were more buyers that day, and if price goes down, there were more sellers that day. On the face of it, that is not necessarily true, because you could have the same number of buyers and sellers, one side could have simply decreased/increased their acceptable price to match the other side.
"I used to use etfconnect before they went paid and started concentrating on closed end funds. These days my source of information is spread out. The primary source about the instrument (ETF) itself is etfdb, backed by information from Morningstar and Yahoo Finance. For comparison charts Google Finance can't be beat. For actual solid details about a specific ETF, would check read the prospectus from the managing firm itself. One other comment, never trust a site that ""tells you"" which securities to buy. The idea is that you need sources of solid information about financial instruments to make a decision, not a site that makes the decision for you. This is due to the fact that everyone has different strategies and goals for their money and a single site saying buy X sell Y will probably lead you to lose your money."
What I do have is this (sample only): Stock X: Average Price of all I purchased before = 80 Total Shares = 200 So if Stock X's price today is 100 how do I know how much my average price will be? Using your sample if you buy 100 new shares and the price is 85 for the purpose of this example your previous total cost is $16,000 ($80 average cost * 200 shares).  With the new example you are adding $8500 to your total cost (100 new shares * $85 example cost per share)  that gives us a total cost of $24,500 and 300 shares. $24,500/300 gives us an average cost of $81.67 per share. As long as you have the average cost and the number of shares you can calculate a new average without knowing what the price was for each transaction. It may still become important to find the price information for tax purposes if you do not sell all of those shares at once and use FIFO for your taxes.
&gt; A short position also loses money if the stock just appreciates more slowly than the broader market, which is one way an overvaluation can correct itself.  Is there a derivative based on the literal second derivative (acceleration) of the stock price? If so, you'd be able to short those, yes?
As BrenBarn stated, tracking fractional transactions beyond 8 decimal places makes no sense in the context of standard stock and mutual fund transactions.  This is because even for the most expensive equities, those fractional shares would still not be worth whole cent amounts, even for account balances in the hundreds of thousands of dollars. One important thing to remember is that when dealing with equities the total cost, number of shares, and share price are all 3 components of the same value.  Thus if you take 2 of those values, you can always calculate the third: (price * shares = cost, cost / price = shares, etc).  What you're seeing in your account (9 decimal places) is probably the result of dividing uneven values (such as $9.37 invested in a commodity which trades for $235.11, results in 0.03985368550891072264046616477394 shares).  Most brokerages will round this value off somewhere, yours just happens to include more decimal places than your financial software allows. Since your brokerage is the one who has the definitive total for your account balance, the only real solution is to round up or down, whichever keeps your total balance in the software in line with the balance shown online.
Who's to say it wasn't priced into the markets, at least to some degree? Without any information on the behaviour of holders pre-expiry, no one can know if they've been shorting the stock in advance of selling on expiry day. And with the float being such a small proportion of the total issuance, there's always the risk of sudden fluctuations picking up big momentum - which could easily explain the 7% drop on expiry day. Add into all this uncertainty, the usual risks of shorting (e.g. limited upside, unlimited downside), and the observed phenomena aren't by any means killer blows of the Efficient Market Hypothesis. That's not to say that such evidence doesn't necessarily exist - just that this isn't it.
S&P/TSX 60 VIX (CAD) is an equation and as the implied volatility of two close to the money TSX 60 options change, the output changes. This is why the intra-day price fluctuates on a graph like a traded product.  Although VIXC can't be traded, it can still be used as an important signal for traders. The excerpt is from slide 12, more information can be found here. https://www.m-x.ca/f_publications_en/vixc_presentation_en.pdf Futures (stage 2) Options, ETFs, OTC Products (stage 3) have not been implemented.
PST, or any of the Ultra Short/Long funds aren't actually holding any traditional securities -- just swaps that are betting on the underlying asset. They also don't track the value of the underlying security over time -- just for one day. (And they're not even guaranteed to do that!) IEF is an actual treasury bond fund that holds real-life treasury securities, not swaps. Shorting a fund like IEF is one option, another is to buy options on a fund like IEF. Be very careful investing with ETFs, and don't buy any until you fully read and understand the prospectus. I got burned by an Ultra Long ETF because I didn't do my homework.
+1.  Most ETFs (namely the passive index-tracking ones) will be taking liquidity via market on close orders, since they absolutely need to be filled.  Active ETFs, which may have more discretion, may be able to provide liquidity during the day based on market conditions and get rebates that way.
"Sure the LBTA has outperformed LVOL recently but they are very similar (Just look at their underlying indices going back to 2007) - they underperform in good markets and tend to outperform more than they underperformed in down markets.  The article should be saying something more like: ""Recent outperformance of LBTA is due to sector specific bets of the ETF""  And the article fails to point out that LBTA is so low volume that it even has trouble tracking its underlying index on a day to day basis. (LVOL is also very low volume, but it's still significantly better than LBTA)."
Not really. This just shows you might be able to fill huge orders a little less cheaply now, but then somebody else gets to fill it at a better price and the HFT/Market Maker took on some risk for some profit. That's pretty much the definition of providing liquidity. How is this raising prices? It's not. Raising prices would be if HFT bought like 2mil worth of stock and just held it for some time, then tried to sell it to you later at a better price, but that's just investing.
Many of the above comments are correct about illiquidity.  If someone needs to trade at a time of low liquidity, for instance when the markets are closed, the bid/ask spread can often be large to induce someone to trade at odd times.  Especially as the broker/bank on the other side of the trade can't immediately go to the market to close out the risk as they often prefer to do. In this case the jump is actually is large but not that large (~4%).  Note this trade price is near the close price on the day before. The system I use shows a trade that evening for 5 shares near the price on the graph.  If you called me after I was done with work and tried to buy 5 shares I'd quote you a bad price too.
"Can you give me evidence that HFT front running is happening? Better yet, can you tell me how, given current market structure, front running is even possible? Don't just tell me ""order types"" and ""faster"", because that doesn't directly lead to front running. In fact, why don't you start by defining what you think to be front running? I have a feeling that will clear up a lot of your apparent misunderstanding.  In the meantime, you're just regurgitating Flash Boys / CNBC hype.  Also, it's a fallacy to say that people ""believe"" in the mission of IEX simply because there's volume there. Market participants will connect to any liquidity source, based purely on their endless quest for more liquidity...  EDIT: By the way, being faster than someone is *not* front running. It's being faster than them. I want to make sure you understand this distinction before venturing into matters you're obviously *very* unfamiliar with."
Okay. They're faster than most other computers. They either have a dedicated fiber line or are physically closer.  But anyways, they flood the NYSE with tons of orders to slow it down. So they see another broker's order in the line up and delete the bogus orders. They can then make the purchase faster than the other guy. The other guy now has to pay a higher strike price than he initially thought the bid would be.   So let's say Apple's quote is 1.00  They send one order for apple  One for IBM  One for Yahoo  One for NBC Comcast  They see another guy wants Apple. So they cancel the orders for IBM, Yahoo and NBC Comcast and leave the Apple one to complete. The Apple one goes through and then they automatically resell it to the guy looking to buy Apple at a price of 1.0001  TLDR  They flood a bunch of orders at a bunch of different prices/quantities. They cancel before it goes through unless they see someone else wants it. If that person wants it they don't cancel.  edit: I don't even know if all or any of those stocks are listed on the NYSE. In today's world it doesn't make a difference anymore. However, replace NYSE with any exchange and the stock with any ticker symbol.  edit 2: They could also manipulate cross listing. Listing the same stock on two different exchanges. Those prices are mostly uniform but of course higher volume on one could mean a higher price on one before they stabilize. So if you can move fast you can buy the stock at the lower price and sell it on the exchange with the higher price.
"Investopedia's explanation of overbought: An asset that has experienced sharp upward movements over a very short period of time is often deemed to be overbought. Determining the degree in which an asset is overbought is very subjective and can differ between investors. Technicians use indicators such as the relative strength index, the stochastic oscillator or the money flow index to identify securities that are becoming overbought. An overbought security is the opposite of one that is oversold. Something to consider is the ""potential buyers"" and ""potential sellers"" of a stock. In the case of overbought, there are many more buyers that have appeared and driven the price to a point that may be seen as ""unsustainably high"" and thus may well come down soon if one looks at the first explanation. For oversold, consider the flip side of this. A real life scenario here would be to consider airline tickets where a flight may be ""overbooked"" that could also be seen as ""oversold"" in that more tickets were sold than seats that are available and thus people will be bumped as not all tickets can be honored in this case. For a stock scenario of ""oversold"" consider how IPOs work where several buyers have to exist to buy the shares so the investment bank isn't stuck holding them which sends up the price since the amount wanted by the buyers may be more than what can be sold. The price shifts in bringing out more of one side than the other is the point you are missing. In shifting the price up, this attracts more sellers to satisfy the buyers. However, if there is a surge of buyers that flood the market, then there could be a perception that the security is overbought in the sense that there may be few buyers left for the security and thus the price may fall in the near term. If the price is coming down, this attracts more buyers to achieve the other side. The potential part is what you don't see and I wonder if you can imagine this part of the market. The airline example I give as an example as you don't seem to think either side of buying or selling can be overloaded.
"Futures are an agreement to buy or sell something in the future.  The futures ""price"" is the price at which you agree to make the trade.  This price does not indicate what will happen in the future so much as it indicates the cost of buying the item today and holding it until the future date.  Hence, for very liquid products such as stock index futures, the futures price is a very simple function of today's stock index value and current short-term interest rates.  If the stock exchange is closed but the futures exchange is open, then using the futures price and interest rates one can back out an implied ""fair value"" for the index, which is in essence the market's estimate of what the stock index value would be right now if the stock market were open.  Of course, as soon as the stock exchange opens, the futures price trades to within a narrow band of the actual index value, where the size of the band depends on transaction costs (bid-ask spread, commissions, etc.)."
Does the market automatically assume a rescheduled call means something major, like the auditors aren't signing the financials, is going on? Yes. (If so, why?) People - including investors - are emotional. And suspicious. And paranoid. Financial discussions tend to make everything sound like a cold, clinical science, and to some degree that is true. But you should never look past something much more simple - people are people. And of course, once all is said and done, acts like a reschedule often do mean something is up. So you've now got a nice mix of fact and emotion.   Does it mean that 95% of the shares' holders are insiders who all decided to sell when they learned about whatever is causing the delay in the con call? No. See Littleadv's answer.
"Considering the fact that you are so unaware of how to find such data, I find it very very hard to believe that you actually need it. ""All trade and finance data for as much tickers and markets as possible."" Wtf does that even mean. You could be referencing thousands of different types of data for any given ""ticker"" with a statement so vague. What are you looking for?"