As of today, the lower limit for trade execution appears to be around 10 micro-seconds. This means it would in principle be possible to execute around 40,000 back-to-back trades in the blink of an eye. If supermarkets ran HFT programmes, the average household could complete its shopping for a lifetime in under a second. Imagine. It is clear from these trends that trading technologists are involved in an arms race. And it is far from over. The new trading frontier is nano-seconds – billionths of a second. And the twinkle in technologists’ (unblinking) eye is pico-seconds – trillionths of a second. HFT firms  3  Mackenzie (2011) provides a brilliant recent account of the role of HFT, in particular in the context of the Flash Crash. HFT is a sub-set of a broader class of algorithmic trading strategies. See also Aldridge (2010). BIS central bankers’ speeches  3  talk of a “race to zero”. This is the promised land of zero “latency” where trading converges on its natural (Planck’s) limit, the speed of light. 4 The race to zero seems like a million miles from the European coffee shop conversations of the 17th century and the noisy trading floors of the 18th, 19th and 20th centuries. The dawn of electronic trading coincided with the dusk for floor trading. Physical proximity lost its allure. As soon as computers processed faster than traders talked, the time was up for human interactions on physical exchanges. Trading became virtual, distance a dinosaur. Or so it seemed.
However, the Swedish banks need to retain the capital they have at present and, therefore, should not pay any extra dividends. Neither does the introduction of the leverage ratio look like being any great problem if the banks maintain current capital levels. We have looked more closely at the four major banks (Nordea, Swedbank, Handelsbanken and SEB) and, at present, none of them falls below the minimum requirement of three per cent. However, the Swedish banks are finding it difficult to comply with the new liquidity requirements. The greatest challenge will probably lie in complying with the structural requirement. Here, the banks have two alternatives – either cutting back on the commitments that require stable funding (for example lending for housing purchases) or exchanging shortterm funding for long-term funding. This second alternative could well result in the banks’ funding costs increasing, which should push lending rates up somewhat. As yet, we have no exact figure on what this may cost in terms of basis points, but we assess that, despite everything, these costs will be small. 10  BIS central bankers’ speeches  How all this will affect the banks’ customers is hard to say. In the final analysis, the question of how these costs will be divided among the banks’ owners and customers is a question of competition. But, as we are now introducing regulations to reduce the risk of bankruptcies, I think it would be reasonable to assume that the banks’ financiers will lower their expected return.