Review: ‘Flash Boys’ by Michael Lewis

Flash Boys coverScore: ***** (5 out of 5)

Bestselling Berkeley author Michael Lewis has been spending a lot of time back East lately. After researching and writing his blockbuster fifteenth nonfiction book, Flash Boys, currently the country’s #1 bestseller, he’s now juggling interviews and appearances triggered by the fallout. I can’t recall any book that has ever before struck such fear into the denizens of Wall Street.

Flash Boys tells the tale of the arcane and long-secret phenomenon known as high-frequency trading (HFT). The book reads like a thriller, showcasing the author’s legendary writing talent. Like the best fiction, it’s centered on people, not abstract processes or institutions, and the prose sings.

As Lewis discovered, HFT is one of the ways that Wall Street cheats investors — and not just small-time investors like you and me, but also the elite folk who manage multi-billion-dollar pension funds and mutual funds (and thus, indirectly, us as well). Initially, the practice was limited to a handful of traders working in small, independent shops, many of them Russian immigrants with advanced degrees in math or science. However, in the course of Lewis’ exploration of this complex and clever technique to game the system, he learned that many of the big Wall Street banks bought into the process as well and gained enormous profits as a result. Altogether, Lewis attests, HFT has robbed the investing public of billions of dollars.

Michael Lewis. Photo: Tabitha Soren

Michael Lewis. Photo: Tabitha Soren

HFT is no more than a computer-age version of the way Paul Julius Reuter made his name a century and a half ago by using telegrams and carrier pigeons to get the news to the London Stock Exchange faster than anyone else. (The result, of course, was the Reuters agency, now Thomson-Reuters Corporation.) By using obscure techniques to learn the intentions of unsuspecting investors milliseconds ahead of everyone else, HFT traders move the market up or down almost instantaneously, buying the investors’ stock at lower prices or selling to them at higher ones. Lewis refers to one HFT company that operated for five years without losing money on any day. (An HFT firm doesn’t invest; it only trades, ending each day with no stock in its name.)

Lewis’ hero is a brilliant young Canadian named Brad Katsuyama, who for many years was head of electronic trading at the little-known Royal Bank of Canada office on Wall Street, earning $2 million a year. In 2008, Katsuyama discovered that the quotes on his ticker tape didn’t reflect the reality of the market, and he set out to learn why. Over the course of two years, by hiring disgruntled veterans of HFT and grilling them endlessly, he came to see better than anyone else how the contemporary stock market really works — and he didn’t like what he saw. Not at all. HFT wasn’t “nice.” He was a Canadian, after all.

Ultimately, the result of Katsuyama’s investigation was a new stock exchange he and his colleagues designed expressly to frustrate HFT traders and assure investors of fair treatment. It’s called IEX (“A market that works for investors”).

Continue reading on Mal Warwick’s Blog on Books

Read more reviews by Mal Warwick, published on Berkeleyside.

Would you like a digest of the day’s Berkeley news sent to your inbox? Click here to subscribe to Berkeleyside’s free Daily Briefing. 

Print Friendly
Tagged , , , ,
  • Robbin Noir

    Yeah Michael Lewis! I still remember “Liar’s Poker.” Hopefully this time people will listen.

  • Hyper_lexic

    I thought I posted essentially this earlier but I don’t see it…

    I haven’t read the book, but I did read the excerpt in the New York Times and was initially swayed.

    However I think this article in Slate makes a good point: http://slate.me/1lLeIrr

    Some key excerpts:

    “If your mom has a brokerage account, or a mutual fund manager, or generally entrusts her retirement savings to any kind of intermediary, then the fees charged by her broker or fund manager will dwarf any profits being skimmed from her by HFT. And if your pop invests in the market himself—if he’s among those people with a TD Ameritrade or E-Trade or Schwab account, the “easy kill” for the high-frequency algorithms, then, in reality, he is the one big winner of the high-frequency game.”

    “Similarly, if any high-frequency traders get prosecuted for insider trading, the message will be clear: The stock market is supposed to be fair, and if anybody is found to be taking advantage of information unavailable to the rest of us, even if it’s only for a millisecond, they’re going to risk a serious fine, or jail, or both. That’s not a good message to send, because the stock market is not fair, it never has been, and it never will be. And you’re doing nobody any favors by encouraging them to believe otherwise.”

  • Charles_Siegel

    Does it follow that we should drop all laws against insider trading? The stock market isn’t fair, but we can control the most blatant forms of unfairness.

  • Alan_Tobey

    Typical ML business-inspired book: all about how he came late to a party, discovered a scandal that all the insiders have known about for years, and showed how clever he was to explain it all to the clueless masses who missed the party entirely.

    By the time the book comes out, the “crisis” is already being addressed and corrected, and the exploiters are already moving on to the next quasi-legal scam. Leaving the masses still clueless.

    His food books are more useful, even though he takes way too much credit for, among other things, actually learning to cook a few simple dishes. But even they just substitute Big Food for Big Finance as the necessary villain. So it’s all the same formula.

    Always a great read, though.

  • http://berkeleyside.com Tracey Taylor

    Hi Alan. I think you’re confusing Michael Lewis with Michael Pollan when you mention books on food.

  • Hyper_lexic

    that’s a fair point… obviously I wouldn’t make that recommendation. to be honest I don’t understand the impressively complex financial market to have an informed point of view.