Abstract
The sale of faster access to financial market data has recently generated public controversy. NY Attorney General Eric Schneiderman has referred to such fast data feeds as “Insider Trading 2.0”. For example, Thomson Reuters sold the University of Michigan’s Consumer Sentiment Index to computerized trading firms 2 seconds before releasing its data to its other paying clients. This paper explores the ethical issues involved in the sale of such information. Is selling faster access ethically the same as traditional insider trading, which generally involves a breach of fiduciary duty or the use of misappropriated information? Such practices are extremely different from traditional insider trading as there is neither a breach of fiduciary duty nor misappropriation of inside information. The ethical issues are similar to other market segmentation and price discrimination issues, in which different prices are charged to different customers. The ability to price discriminate across segments can actually benefit large segments of the population who may receive lower prices because others, such as the high-speed traders, are paying more. The sale of faster access to information, especially by exchanges, raises additional ethical issues. There may be adverse effects on market quality that must be addressed. The moral distaste for the practice expressed by some stems from the seeming unfairness of a modern market structure that provides advantages to a small group of computerized traders.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.