from Hacker News

Should the stock market never close?

by biscuit1v9 on 4/28/24, 1:20 PM with 65 comments

  • by throw0101c on 4/28/24, 1:48 PM

  • by pavlov on 4/28/24, 2:07 PM

    Most trading happens just after market open (reflecting information released since the market closed the previous day) and just before market close (because end-of-day prices are important in many contexts).

    So maybe there could instead be a chill stock exchange which is open for just two brief 15-minute windows, one in the New York morning and another in the evening.

  • by throw0101c on 4/28/24, 1:53 PM

    > The survey comes as start-up 24 Exchange, backed by Steve Cohen’s Point72 Ventures fund, is seeking SEC approval to launch the first round-the-clock exchange. The filing is the second attempt for 24X, which withdrew a proposal last year over operational and technical issues.

    I know it is quite common, but I always found it strange that The (Free) Market™—where stocks are traded—was itself a commercial entity and traded on the same exchange(s) that it ran.

    * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intercontinental_Exchange

    * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/London_Stock_Exchange_Group

  • by Apreche on 4/28/24, 1:59 PM

    My concern is simply labor. If trading is 24/7 that means people will be working or on call 24/7. Not much sympathy for finance bros, but for the tech people and others.

    Then again, it may create some jobs if they have to hire night and weekend staff.

  • by delduca on 4/28/24, 1:59 PM

    24/7 reminds me of when I used to work with crypto. It was basically madness.

  • by highwayman47 on 4/28/24, 1:51 PM

    Keeping it open any longer than it is, is going to cause liquidity issues. We already have an aftermarket anyways.

  • by lambdaone on 4/28/24, 1:52 PM

    This sounds risky: is the goal truly 100% uptime? Real 24/7 is difficult, even in safety-critical fields. When would you ever push out fixes or do live testing?

  • by Andrew_nenakhov on 4/28/24, 2:29 PM

    Cryptocurrency exchanges are typically 24/7 and as someone who does occasional trading, I can confidently say that it is very stressful: anything can happen while you sleep. So you sleep less when you have some open positions.

  • by jfengel on 4/28/24, 2:25 PM

    Conversely: we have computers now. Why shouldn't stock traders get the benefit of the increased productivity? Maybe the stock market should go to a four day week. Maybe just a few hours per day.

  • by nobodyandproud on 4/28/24, 2:21 PM

    No.

    The stock market should be an equalizer, but this will mostly benefit buy-side firms that have enough headcount or the infrastructure to support 24/7 trading.

  • by paxys on 4/28/24, 2:28 PM

    It isn't going to change anything in the grand scheme of things. The market swings on news, and there's mostly no news after hours. And even when there is, people who want to trade already manage to do it 24x7 in a variety of ways (hence the wild swings sometimes in between market closing and opening the following day).

  • by thehours on 4/28/24, 2:34 PM

    IIRC this topic was mentioned in the Game Theory chapter of ‘Algorithms to Live By’ as an example of Mechanism Design, but I don’t have it handy to offer anything more than a bread crumb reference from memory.

  • by xnx on 4/28/24, 2:47 PM

    No strong opinion on operating hours, but trades should be configured to only occur once a minute to eliminate high-frequency training.

  • by belter on 4/28/24, 3:35 PM

    Title is: "New York Stock Exchange tests views on round-the-clock trading"

  • by flakeoil on 4/28/24, 2:01 PM

    I suppose they want more transactions and thus more revenue.

    Edit: During the Internet bubble around 1999/2000 several markets extended their opening hours by a few hours. Later, after the bubble had burst, they went back to the old opening hours.

  • by alchemist1e9 on 4/28/24, 2:36 PM

    Yes. Everyone who proposes restricting trading, or limiting to a few auctions, or claiming HFT doesn’t add social value, is simply misinformed.

    Assets which have continues liquidity have more utility for owners. Not only can markets instantly digest new information in a way that is fair, but also when there is no information and prices are stable, participants can make decisions for their own personal objectives at the very moment it’s most relevant to them. Imagine you can sell a few shares of your Nvidia holdings at midnight on Friday and it funds your Paypal card you swipe a few seconds later at the nightclub? There is absolutely no technical downside to expanding trading hours.

    HFT and electronic markets overall have massively decreased the transaction costs within asset markets, we are talking multiple orders of magnitude.

    Unfortunate HN is infiltrated with a large contingent of technically literate people who are completely economically illiterate, likely due to a systemic problem with western education system. For this reason they believe nonsense like markets are unfair, HFT is a zero sum arms race, highly regulated restricted auctions is a good idea, capitalism is evil, landlords are evil, governments are good and protect the people. All of which are completely idiotic beliefs that can only come from failure to have been taught economics and read history.

    Obviously stock markets can go 24/7 and it a strictly good thing.

  • by biscuit1v9 on 4/28/24, 1:50 PM

    Don't know if archiving it was necessary.

    On my side: all the content is available & no pop-ups.

  • by ArtTimeInvestor on 4/28/24, 2:08 PM

    There should be no stock market. At least not one that is operated by people.

    The market for assets would be more efficient if we tokenize the assets. Then they can be transparently traded according to fixed rules. No opening times, no downtimes, no questions about how the system works.