I can tell this is a shill piece because you neglected to mention that FINRA does not post non-member or offshore shorting volume. Member firms often move their shorts offshores. Disingenuous and unprofessional as always Keubiko.
Naked shorts are getting so desperate that they are now starting blogs in their last very desperate attempts to influence the narrative before they have to cover.
I like GSX, a Chinese educational technology company that has taken a beating because a large investor got a margin call and panic ensued. It has been under attack by short sellers for some time and is facing a huge recovery after they had a promising investor day recently.
Sorry, to be honest, I was just kidding, but I missed these comments here. Good blog, looking forward for more!
Read the article you are comment on. The key point is the daily short volume has virtually NOTHING to do with actual short selling. It's just an order execution mechanic.
You misunderstood and didn't answer his question. A short sale can be closed the same day which does not contribute to short interest - as you explained. But if short volume is 51% then it's impossible to close that out the same day because every buy needs a sell - so there is a guaranteed increase of the short interest every day the short volume is greater than 50%. This is just math and it seems like you missed this edge case. You cannot sell 51% short and then buy 51% short the same day because it would add up to over 100%, so if there is greater than 50% short volume by definition the short interest has increased that day.
I appreciate your post because it discredits a lot of misinformation, but you completely missed the point of the person you're responding to. You asked him to read the article but his question is definitively not within the scope of what you wrote. He pointed out an edge case that you seem to have missed.
No that's not how it works. Again, short volume has no bearing on actual short selling. Market making alone will make any such conclusions impossible. E.g. a market maker selling from inventory won't mark a trade as short. He (and you now) are drawing false conclusions about daily short volume. Almost all of it comes from market making activities and the percentage is virtually meaningless. Can read more here: https://blog.otcmarkets.com/2023/05/08/what-investors-should-know-about-finra-daily-short-sale-volume-data/
I think you're still misunderstanding, although I appreciate you responding.
You keep alluding to the disconnect between short volume and short interest, but that's missing the point. *If* greater than 50% of volume is short, how is it possible for the short interest not to increase? By definition a short sale requires a buyer to not increase short interest, correct? I think I can sum up my point succinctly with a question. If 100% of volume is short for a day, does that mean the short volume does not necessarily increase? If the answer to that question is no then I may be wrong, but if the answer is yes then math dictates that any day with short volume over 50% must increase the short interest buy definition of buyer/seller symmetry. If someone marks a sale short, *and they don't buy it back the same day*, does that not increase the short interest by whatever 1 share comes out to as a percentage? You can't have 51% short and 51% long in the same day, so the short interest must increase. It's how accounting works.
Nothing in your post or the article you cite refutes this. I understand that it's possible to have a ton of short sales and not increase the short interest, but once you hit 50% by definition it has to go up.
Many ways. Here’s a simple one: a short seller covers shares by buying, but the buy order gets marked as a short sale on the tape by the executing broker. Result: short interest actually goes down while reported short volume goes up. Another example: broker sale to client from its own inventory marked as a short sale under FINRA’s broad definition. Result: no involvement of short sellers at all yet short volume % goes up. Firms with DMA access, market makers, executing brokers, high frequency prop traders. Some executing brokers and market makers with and without inventory throughout the day, and so on. Trades get executed and reported in a multitude of ways and there’s no real conclusion to be drawn from the daily short volume data. It’s basically garbage data “in the name of transparency” that has been one of the most damaging things to capital markets over the past several years as people look at this data and think every single tick is an epic struggle between longs and “the shorts”. ✌️
To illustrate using an extreme example, imagine an illiquid microcap that has an single trade for the day, with absolutely no involvement of short sellers, using FINRA's example below - in such a case "short volume" would 100%:
First, as noted above, the data in the Short Sale Files includes only trades that are publicly disseminated and excludes trades that are not publicly disseminated. As a result, some offsetting buying activity related to reported short selling would not be reflected in the Daily File and may result in the appearance of a higher concentration of short sale to total volume.
A common example is where a firm is facilitating a customer order to sell long. The firm may elect to first sell an equivalent number of shares from its own trading account to another firm and then purchase the shares from the customer at the same price to fill the outstanding long sale order. Trading in this manner reduces risk for the firm by enabling it to manage its inventory and lock in a price for the customer execution. Although this trading model involves two separate trades—one between the two firms and one between the firm and its customer—the two offsetting trades are executed at the same price to fill a single customer order. Thus, FINRA rules provide for the public dissemination of only one of the trades (the trade between the two firms) so as not to overstate the reported volume.5 If the firm facilitating the customer long sale order has either no position or a short position in the security in its trading account, the trade with the other firm is reported as short and included in the short sale volume calculations in the Daily File. The volume associated with the firm’s purchase from its customer, however, is not reflected in the Daily File. Thus, the firm’s short sale is included in the short sale volume calculations without any indication that it is associated with an offsetting purchase to facilitate a customer long sale.
Thus it's possible to have large or even the majority (or theoretically all) volume for a day being "short sales" when they are nothing but longs providing the sell volume.
Conclusion: Useless garbage data that is a menace.
> Trades get executed and reported in a multitude of ways and there’s no real conclusion to be drawn from the daily short volume data. It’s basically garbage data “in the name of transparency”
What data do you think is reliable? At least we can trust the price of a stock, and I assume the volume (I don't think there is any way to avoid trades going to the lit tape, even if it's delayed or done in dark pools - please correct me if I'm wrong).
If you point me in the right direction I'm happy to read and learn, as I realize constantly answering questions about the basics of market data could become tiresome. Thank you in advance, and even if you don't reply again thank you for the replies you've already given.
Anyone interested should check out squeezemetrics writing on how to use this Finra data. This data is only coming from the dark pools and not the lit markets.
Can you dedicate your blog to just debunking all the ridiculous "DD" on /r/superstonk? These guys think they have it all figured out and the entire market's going to get swallowed into a black hole because of GME.
Thanks for writing this, I actually had no idea how the shorts were reported and this provided a lot of clarity. Also made me aware that most of the people of forums and SM have no clue about what’s going on (ditto some CEOs)
Thanks Stacy. Yes it's a sad state of affairs out there. I always like the saying that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions, but not his or her own facts. Cheers
Can I ask you what your honest opinion is what will be happening with $GME. is it just gonna slowcrab down b/c the squeeze is done or are all the qanon larpers onto something? I've made my gains on GME, would not mind more, but if it's it is done..
I honestly don't have much a view on GME . Fundamentally I don't see the stock worth more than about $20 per share, being generous. Its biggest asset right now is the halo from the short squeeze and a fluffed up share price, so I think it's a dance between how much equity they can raise a silly prices and pivoting the company with that capital before it crashes. Very very risk. I'm not touching it long or short.
Your feeble attempt to trivialize the Manichaean struggle between shorts and longs is noted.
Put wang in Vitamix to atone for your sins.
I can tell this is a shill piece because you neglected to mention that FINRA does not post non-member or offshore shorting volume. Member firms often move their shorts offshores. Disingenuous and unprofessional as always Keubiko.
Naked shorts are getting so desperate that they are now starting blogs in their last very desperate attempts to influence the narrative before they have to cover.
What other stocks do you like?
I like GSX, a Chinese educational technology company that has taken a beating because a large investor got a margin call and panic ensued. It has been under attack by short sellers for some time and is facing a huge recovery after they had a promising investor day recently.
Sorry, to be honest, I was just kidding, but I missed these comments here. Good blog, looking forward for more!
Dammit, I was hoping a few dozen baggies would come over and start giving me the business.
I thought I was the only one left who says “giving you/me the business.” It’s nice to know I’m not alone.
This reply is pure gold.
Hopefully we'll see ya back on Twitter! ♥️✌️
https://www.threads.net/@KeubikoOriginal
Thanks for explaining this so a dummy like me can understand !
If short volume is 51% or higher, how can it be mathematically possible for short interest to not increase?
Read the article you are comment on. The key point is the daily short volume has virtually NOTHING to do with actual short selling. It's just an order execution mechanic.
You misunderstood and didn't answer his question. A short sale can be closed the same day which does not contribute to short interest - as you explained. But if short volume is 51% then it's impossible to close that out the same day because every buy needs a sell - so there is a guaranteed increase of the short interest every day the short volume is greater than 50%. This is just math and it seems like you missed this edge case. You cannot sell 51% short and then buy 51% short the same day because it would add up to over 100%, so if there is greater than 50% short volume by definition the short interest has increased that day.
I appreciate your post because it discredits a lot of misinformation, but you completely missed the point of the person you're responding to. You asked him to read the article but his question is definitively not within the scope of what you wrote. He pointed out an edge case that you seem to have missed.
No that's not how it works. Again, short volume has no bearing on actual short selling. Market making alone will make any such conclusions impossible. E.g. a market maker selling from inventory won't mark a trade as short. He (and you now) are drawing false conclusions about daily short volume. Almost all of it comes from market making activities and the percentage is virtually meaningless. Can read more here: https://blog.otcmarkets.com/2023/05/08/what-investors-should-know-about-finra-daily-short-sale-volume-data/
I think you're still misunderstanding, although I appreciate you responding.
You keep alluding to the disconnect between short volume and short interest, but that's missing the point. *If* greater than 50% of volume is short, how is it possible for the short interest not to increase? By definition a short sale requires a buyer to not increase short interest, correct? I think I can sum up my point succinctly with a question. If 100% of volume is short for a day, does that mean the short volume does not necessarily increase? If the answer to that question is no then I may be wrong, but if the answer is yes then math dictates that any day with short volume over 50% must increase the short interest buy definition of buyer/seller symmetry. If someone marks a sale short, *and they don't buy it back the same day*, does that not increase the short interest by whatever 1 share comes out to as a percentage? You can't have 51% short and 51% long in the same day, so the short interest must increase. It's how accounting works.
Nothing in your post or the article you cite refutes this. I understand that it's possible to have a ton of short sales and not increase the short interest, but once you hit 50% by definition it has to go up.
Many ways. Here’s a simple one: a short seller covers shares by buying, but the buy order gets marked as a short sale on the tape by the executing broker. Result: short interest actually goes down while reported short volume goes up. Another example: broker sale to client from its own inventory marked as a short sale under FINRA’s broad definition. Result: no involvement of short sellers at all yet short volume % goes up. Firms with DMA access, market makers, executing brokers, high frequency prop traders. Some executing brokers and market makers with and without inventory throughout the day, and so on. Trades get executed and reported in a multitude of ways and there’s no real conclusion to be drawn from the daily short volume data. It’s basically garbage data “in the name of transparency” that has been one of the most damaging things to capital markets over the past several years as people look at this data and think every single tick is an epic struggle between longs and “the shorts”. ✌️
To illustrate using an extreme example, imagine an illiquid microcap that has an single trade for the day, with absolutely no involvement of short sellers, using FINRA's example below - in such a case "short volume" would 100%:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keys to Understanding Short Sale Volume Data
First, as noted above, the data in the Short Sale Files includes only trades that are publicly disseminated and excludes trades that are not publicly disseminated. As a result, some offsetting buying activity related to reported short selling would not be reflected in the Daily File and may result in the appearance of a higher concentration of short sale to total volume.
A common example is where a firm is facilitating a customer order to sell long. The firm may elect to first sell an equivalent number of shares from its own trading account to another firm and then purchase the shares from the customer at the same price to fill the outstanding long sale order. Trading in this manner reduces risk for the firm by enabling it to manage its inventory and lock in a price for the customer execution. Although this trading model involves two separate trades—one between the two firms and one between the firm and its customer—the two offsetting trades are executed at the same price to fill a single customer order. Thus, FINRA rules provide for the public dissemination of only one of the trades (the trade between the two firms) so as not to overstate the reported volume.5 If the firm facilitating the customer long sale order has either no position or a short position in the security in its trading account, the trade with the other firm is reported as short and included in the short sale volume calculations in the Daily File. The volume associated with the firm’s purchase from its customer, however, is not reflected in the Daily File. Thus, the firm’s short sale is included in the short sale volume calculations without any indication that it is associated with an offsetting purchase to facilitate a customer long sale.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thus it's possible to have large or even the majority (or theoretically all) volume for a day being "short sales" when they are nothing but longs providing the sell volume.
Conclusion: Useless garbage data that is a menace.
> Trades get executed and reported in a multitude of ways and there’s no real conclusion to be drawn from the daily short volume data. It’s basically garbage data “in the name of transparency”
What data do you think is reliable? At least we can trust the price of a stock, and I assume the volume (I don't think there is any way to avoid trades going to the lit tape, even if it's delayed or done in dark pools - please correct me if I'm wrong).
If you point me in the right direction I'm happy to read and learn, as I realize constantly answering questions about the basics of market data could become tiresome. Thank you in advance, and even if you don't reply again thank you for the replies you've already given.
Anyone interested should check out squeezemetrics writing on how to use this Finra data. This data is only coming from the dark pools and not the lit markets.
Can you dedicate your blog to just debunking all the ridiculous "DD" on /r/superstonk? These guys think they have it all figured out and the entire market's going to get swallowed into a black hole because of GME.
Yeah, but KOSS had a huge short squeeze. What do you have to say about that?
What does that have to do with anything?
Thanks for writing this, I actually had no idea how the shorts were reported and this provided a lot of clarity. Also made me aware that most of the people of forums and SM have no clue about what’s going on (ditto some CEOs)
Thanks Stacy. Yes it's a sad state of affairs out there. I always like the saying that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinions, but not his or her own facts. Cheers
The irony is the "short sale volume" actually shows the amount of buying that occurred in the dark pools.
A lot of words for "no-one will fuck me and my I lose money every day from shorting"
Another satisfied customer.
Can I ask you what your honest opinion is what will be happening with $GME. is it just gonna slowcrab down b/c the squeeze is done or are all the qanon larpers onto something? I've made my gains on GME, would not mind more, but if it's it is done..
I honestly don't have much a view on GME . Fundamentally I don't see the stock worth more than about $20 per share, being generous. Its biggest asset right now is the halo from the short squeeze and a fluffed up share price, so I think it's a dance between how much equity they can raise a silly prices and pivoting the company with that capital before it crashes. Very very risk. I'm not touching it long or short.
Thanks! I made my gains, I am moving on then.