Re:Trading halted as U.S. stocks plummet
by skybrian on Monday March 09, 2020 @07:03PM
(#22530882)
Then again, why not shorter hours? Matt Levine writes about this occasionally:
> We talk occasionally about proposals to shorten the stock trading day from its current 6.5 hours (in the U.S.) to, say, half an hour. The idea is partly that traders would have more time to spend with their families and dogs and hobbies, but one shouldn’t overestimate that. Really what it means is that you have 23.5 hours a day to ponder information and synthesize it into stock-price views, and then half an hour to trade stocks based on those views. The big advantage is that anyone who might want to buy stocks can pay attention to the stock market for that half an hour, so the liquidity during that half-hour should be pretty good. When the trading day is 6.5 hours, sometimes no one’s around when things happen, and you have to shut the market down for a bit to call everyone back in. But I don’t think that’s quite what happened this morning.
> We talk occasionally about proposals to shorten the stock trading day from its current 6.5 hours (in the U.S.) to, say, half an hour. The idea is partly that traders would have more time to spend with their families and dogs and hobbies, but one shouldn’t overestimate that. Really what it means is that you have 23.5 hours a day to ponder information and synthesize it into stock-price views, and then half an hour to trade stocks based on those views. The big advantage is that anyone who might want to buy stocks can pay attention to the stock market for that half an hour, so the liquidity during that half-hour should be pretty good. When the trading day is 6.5 hours, sometimes no one’s around when things happen, and you have to shut the market down for a bit to call everyone back in. But I don’t think that’s quite what happened this morning.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2020-03-09/stuff-...