NYSE Eyes 24/7 Tokenized Stock Trading With Weekend Access and Same-Day Settlement (nerds.xyz) 38
BrianFagioli writes: The New York Stock Exchange, owned by Intercontinental Exchange, is developing a platform for trading tokenized versions of U.S. listed stocks and ETFs around the clock, pending regulatory approval. The system would combine the NYSE's existing matching engine with blockchain-based settlement, enabling 24x7 trading, instant settlement, and fractional share purchases priced in dollar amounts. Shares would remain fully regulated securities, with dividends and voting rights intact, rather than cryptocurrencies, even though the backend would run on blockchain-style infrastructure.
All For It (Score:4)
I cannot comprehend why, in 2026 or even 2019, it takes two days to settle a trade. It's all electronic and it should be instant.
Also, 24/7 is good. So long as they don't pull some nonsense like the margin sellers do with overnight holding.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest long-shot Louie at Hialeah wouldn't put a fin on my fate now.
Re: I'm all for tokenized trading too. (Score:2)
What's stopping you?
Re: (Score:2)
With volume not growing proportional to hours of operation you end up with a higher bid/ask spread, which favors the exchange and market makers. You will also tend to get more algorythmic trading required for protection when people are not actively watching things for themselves. This all creates opportunities for flash crashes to strip shares from people who have [simple] stop-loss orders in place.
If you want to know how it will end up just look at futures trading... much more like a casino.
My ADHD might
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I cannot comprehend why, in 2026 or even 2019, it takes two days to settle a trade.
That is because you are clueless. The effects of errors would be catastrophic (and not in the sense of some small, localized catastrophe that only kills a few 1000 people), and hence there are checks upon checks and reaction time in case things fail.
Re: (Score:2)
Well then you had better educate the "clueless" fucks at the NYSE that are implementing this very thing right now so that we aren't all immediately killed by their ignorance.
Or, perhaps you're not quite as informed as you imagine yourself to be.
Re: (Score:2)
You are just not capable of understanding the article or your own statement. Fascinating.
Ok, I will take mercy on those that come unarmed to a battle of wits: There is a difference between "instant" and "same day". Maybe if you try really hard you can see it.
Re: (Score:2)
Try harder. You're flailing.
Re: (Score:2)
If you think Wall Street is a casino now, with all of it's disconnections from reality and the average person, wait until something like this gets approved. You might as well legalize Las Vegas deducting from everyone's pay checks a mandatory buy-in fee using the same method that Social Security is already.
Re: (Score:2)
I love how banks still use weekends and federal holidays as a excuse to delay deposits as well. There is no physical money moving here anymore, it's all been data in a computer for the past 30+ years. Anything to avoid paying interest for as long as possible, I guess.
Re: (Score:2)
It is not an excuse. It is for plausibility controls, fraud detection, etc.
Incidentally, in Europe, the booking for is retroactively, so there is no "avoid paying interest". That this is apparently not done in the US is a political problem.
I even had bookings here were I was charged for overdraw by the target bank and then two days later got it back in full, completely automated.
Calculation Power? (Score:4, Interesting)
So maybe i'm missing something, but it's my understanding with most blockchain based applications the big thing is calculating "proof-of-ownership". However as the size of the chain increases, the calcuation power and time required to do it also increases (I don't remember if it's linearly, logrithmically, etc.). For a low volume application, this is feasible. But how would this work with things like HFT and massive volume changes in terms of time and compute power required.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The benefit that I understand is that you can trade arbitrary portions of a share but maintain proof that shares are never over/undersold.
Re: (Score:2)
The tokenization is the "innovation." The price is relative to the percentage ownership rather than an arbitrary "share". Today "real" trading is in blocks of 100 shares, so if a stock price is $33 then primary settlement is in increments of $3,300. This lets you trade $10,000.01 exactly with (theoretically) primary settlement. What it is more likely to do is shift primary settlement to blocks closer to $100,000 or $1 million and create arbitrage on bid/ask for smaller amounts.
Presumably the backend is al
What value does this offer (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
It is buzzword-compliant and management-stupidity-compliant. No tech benefits.
Also may appeal to the orange ape.
Please no... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Great... so now instead of having to worry about my crypto portfolio crashing over weekend, I can worry about my entire retirement portfolio crashing over the weekend! Yay progress!
Re: Please no... (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I kind of have the same perspective; if you are in for short term moves (less than a year in this context) then now you need to either enter and exit a trade immediately with no "overnight" exposure, or develop some way to hedge volatility. Great for the exchange, great for trading platforms with algorithm integration, less so for a trader managing their own portfolio.
Day-trading doesn't change much, and for almost everything else (holding duration-wise) options start to look better.
It's a terrible idea (Score:2)
Absolute minfield (Score:4, Insightful)
I can’t even predict whether this would make things better or worse. What will this do to the high-frequency traders and the other predatory players? If it makes the market more efficient for normal participants, I guess that I’m for it.
The key is the words “regulated securities, with dividends and voting rights intact”. That stuff usually means “slow”. Running this at video game speed could create all sorts of problems. What happens the first time that a state pension fund initiates a multibillion dollar trade, but simultaneously the company declares a stock buyback, then 15 milliseconds later they declare bankruptcy because the CEO has moved company assets into crypto and transferred them overseas over the span of 5 millseconds, and 10 milliseonds later a VC firm makes a bid for control followed by a pile-on by speculative shortsellers, and there’s zero time to sort it out because it gets instantly perma-welded into the blockchain because that’s a “feature” and every player is hoping to skim some money away from the pension fund. Sorry, the Texas pension fund isn’t gonna allow itself to quietly get screwed. There’s major big money on the line, and they have an army of lawyers just waiting to go full “this is sparta” on the exchange.
The answer is “build in time to allow a group of humans to sort it out”, but that means that some people need to have god-level power to go in and edit the blockchain, which seems to negate the entire idea of a system that instantly and perfectly runs itself immutably through the power of some arcane computational algorithm.
Re: (Score:2)
If it makes the market more efficient for normal participants, I guess that I’m for it.
I feel like I'm a normal participant and I haven't made a trade in years. I certainly won't be trading whatever "tokenized" stocks are in my IRA.
Re: (Score:2)
For my IRAs I would love tokenization. It keeps me from having odd amounts in cash that I can't invest. For my trading portfolio with a few orders of magnitude more money it complicates a lot of things though and creates all kinds of opportunities for me to screw up.
I am guessing this does a little to tame what is currently after-hours trading, and matching buyer and seller suddenly becomes a function both of total value and bid/ask price per share. [Today you have more of a primary settlement in blocks
I'm with Buffet on this one (Score:5, Interesting)
We have far too large and apparently-profitable marketplace living off the (non-productive) whiplash trading of financial instruments.
I'm generally a free-marketeer but we need to SLOW DOWN the system, not speed it up.
IIRC he advocated some sort of 100% penalty tax on any stock sold within a year of purchase.
COMPELLING the pump'n'dumpers to contemplate their trades against LONG TERM futures would greatly inhibit this lucrative, actually-valueless shadow economy.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
It doesn't serve it's intended purpose anymore; it has become a game. It's a casino and now turning into a video game phone app...
We NEED to slow it down but we also should tax transactions and tying those to speed would be a good idea as well. When it's a complex block chain that requires serious computing they have zero excuse to not track time and amount and slap a sales tax on it. At least as much as the brokers get... who used to get high fees per transaction without crashing the whole market; as the
Faster way for retail to blow their accounts (Score:3)
Bad news for human traders (Score:2)
Centralized exchange does not need a blockhain (Score:2)
A blockchain is a decentralized ledger. If you are a centralized exchange, like the NYSE, you not only don't need a blockchain you have no use for a blockchain.
Now if you want to trade without an exchange a blockchain could be useful. But you won't be the NYSE.