If you trade the S&P 500 Emini Futures, or trade the Nasdaq, Dow Jones, Rusell mini futures, or if you trade Forex and Crude Oil you need to check out www.sceeto.com for one of the worlds most advanced indicators. A no obligation Free Trial is availible.www.sceeto.com
Trade Station daily Report 10th August Russell TF Futures.Free Binary Options Signals. Check out http://www.sceeto.com as well as http://www.binaryforecast.com sign up to Sceeto for free real time trading signals/alerts which once you use them you'll wonder how you ever traded without them. Sceeto is probably the worlds most adavanced set of indicators. We are sure you've seen nothing like them before. In financial markets payment for order flow refers to the compensation that a broker receives, not from its client, but from a third-party who wants to influence how the broker routes client orders.[1] Generally, market-makers such as dealers and securities exchanges are willing to pay a broker for the right to transact with that broker's clients because they believe those clients will be uninformed traders. Often these uninformed traders are retail[2] or other investors who are trading because of emotion or the need to raise cash and not because they know an asset is mis-valued. By purchasing what it expects to be uninformed order flow, a market-maker can buy at the bid and sell at the ask with less risk of trading at a loss than with an informed trader who knows that the market is mispricing the security.[3] Thus, market-makers who pay for order flow can capture the spread while reducing the risk that the spread is too narrow to adequately compensate them for the risk of loss.
Payment for order flow was a practice pioneered by Bernard Madoff, and the practice has long been controversial.[4][5][6] However, on February 27, 2009, after years of opposing payment for order flow, the New York Stock Exchange sought permission from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to allow payment for order flow on its electronic exchange(s).[7] The NYSE is proposing to pay for limit orders in order to put more cash into the market. This contrasts with the traditional model of payment for order flow that pays only for market orders. Payment for order flow has become less lucrative on a per share basis because of the decline in the tick size and the bid/ask spread. When stocks traded on 1/8ths of a dollar, payments for order flow were much larger than they became after 2001 when the tick size in U.S. markets fell to one cent.[3][4] Larry Harris reports that in 1997, 24% of E*TRADE's transaction revenue came from payment for order flow, but that by the second quarter of 2001 such payments accounted for only 15% of transaction revenue.[3]
