• May
  • 07
  • 2007
  • 11:53 AM

CORRECTED: How much volume is 'Hybrid?'

By: Ray Pellecchia
File Under: NYSE, NYSE

Correcting a couple of numbers in this post, in bold below. Automated trading accounts for 91.5 percent of the trades on NYSE, not 95.1 percent as I said earlier today. I apologize for my mistake -- RP

A reader on the sell side asks:

What percent of total NYSE volume is via hybrid?
-- Michael Richter


Michael -- If by "via hybrid" you mean "automated," here's the answer:

In the first quarter of 2007, automated trading on NYSE accounted for 91.5 percent of the transactions and 82.1 percent of the share volume.

Your question raises a couple of important issues, Michael. One is that there continues to be floor trading on NYSE. The trading floor accounted for 8.5 percent of the trades and 17.9 percent of the shares, signifying to me that customers are still looking to the floor to help represent larger, more difficult trades.

The other point is that here, Hybrid refers to the combination of automated and auction trading, not just the automated portion. Specialists and floor brokers have the electronic tools to be part of the automated component of the market in addition to the trading-floor component. I know, specialist participation and price improvement have been too low in the current set-up, but that is not the intent, and it's something we're working on, as noted here last week.

Hope that answers the question. Thanks for writing, Michael!

Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments

Hey Ray:

Does the exchange plan to publish the volume executed by floor brokers and specialists? Data suggests the latter is off by about 50% since Phase III, and a recent NYSE filing says the former is off 49% from Q1 06 to Q1 07 (see page 5 of http://apps.nyse.com/commdata/pub19b4.nsf/docs/5E585CC41407AFC1852572D400772E0B/$FILE/NYSE-2007-45.pdf). Definitive data would be more helpful, I think.

Thanks,
JS

by Jamie Selway on May 9, 2007 10:02 AM

Jamie -- Sorry, I haven't heard of any plans to issue that data. But I'll ask that it be considered as we evaluate our public statistics going forward.

Thanks as always for writing!

by Ray Pellecchia on May 11, 2007 4:58 PM

Comment on this entry

Forward this entry to a friend