Market Making Versus Trading Against Client Flow
Summary
The document distinguishes earning a spread as a market maker from taking directional positions based on client trades. In equities and futures, a market maker may seek to turn over inventory quickly and earn the bid–ask spread; client profitability can differ according to holding period and market direction. In options, a dealer may delta hedge and focus on the implied volatility spread, while an unhedged customer retains directional exposure. These examples show why dealer profits do not automatically imply customer losses.
The answers also describe using information from executed client flow to form a proprietary market view after handling the order. Reversing client trades outright is presented as a distinct, risky position-taking activity that exposes the trader to underlying price movements. The discussion is qualitative and anecdotal: it provides no performance data or general rule about when client flow predicts returns, and actual practices depend on instruments, risk limits, and business models.
Key ideas
- Market makers can earn bid–ask spread while keeping inventory turnover high.
- A delta-hedged options dealer may focus on volatility exposure rather than the customer’s directional outcome.
- Dealer and client profits are not necessarily opposing sides of the same result.
- Trading directionally against client flow adds market risk and differs from pure market making.
- Executed customer flow may inform proprietary views, subject to execution duties and risk limits.
Tags
Full text
# Is it possible to make profit by reversing client trades for a market maker? # Is it possible to make profit by reversing client trades for a market maker? If a market maker is making profit in a considerably enough period, then does it mean that the clients that bought/sold from/to the market maker lost money? If so, is it possible that market makers can make more profit by leveraging their clients' trades by reversing? Is there such a concept in the literature? Thanks ## Answer by roz (score 7) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/51404 If you are market making equities or futures you tend to make your profits over the short term by flipping your inventory. So if I'm showing 3.00 bid at 3.01 ask on a stock I'm going to tend to flip it pretty quickly for 0.01 profit. The guys that bought and sold from me may make/lose money depending on the length of their holding period and market direction. Our profits are generally not related. If I'm making markets in options I will be delta hedged and thinking in volatility terms. I may show a market of 3.00 bid at 3.05 ask in an option but what this really corresponds to is probably something like 20% implied vol bid at 22% implied vol ask. Since I'm going to delta hedge and try to eliminate directional exposure to the underlying, I'm really trying to collect that implied volatility bid-ask spread edge. The guys that buy and sell from me probably don't delta hedge. So if they buy the call from me at 3.05, the underlying may in fact go up (he profits on it) but the realized volatility is only 20% and (since I'm delta hedged) I profit as well. So again, our profits are not necessarily related in the way you described. ## Answer by nbbo2 (score 2) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/51405 Not usually done. There may be a few marketmakers who also make money by reversing the customers trades (for example some retail FX marketmakers), but this is risky because it requires taking a position in the underlying. A pure market maker avoids this exposure by keeping inventory low, getting rid of stock he buys by selling it to someone else as soon as possible. So these are two very different ways of making money which should not be mixed up in our minds (1) marketmaking (2) position taking based on customer trades. (Different risks, different success factors, different business model). ## Answer by Attack68 (score 1) https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/51444 Actually I think it is more case for the opposite. As a market-maker I regularly priced and executed trades for large hedge funds: Brevan-Howard, Pimco, Bluecrest etc. Being in a position to see their executed flow allows you to take a view on whether you think they are correct or not, either in establishing new positions or taking-profit or stopping out of existing positions. Large hedge funds have dedicated research and resources to analyse markets so the outcome of that analysis can be quite valuable, particularly if the fund is consistently profitable. Of course, you have to prioritise the execution of the customers order, but after that there are no restrictions on how to position your own book in anticipation of new orders or potentially new market movements within the scope of your risk limit. Of course the other answers relating to pure market-maker activity nicely document the difference between market-making and proprietary trading
Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.