Liu Jipeng: Quantitative Trading Cannot Sacrifice the Fairness of 95% of Investors in Exchange for the Efficiency of 5% of Institutions

MaticHoleFiller · 2026-03-13T07:22:36+00:00

At Sina Finance's 3·15 Investor Protection Forum, Professor Liu Jipeng pointed out the challenges posed by quantitative trading to the rights and interests of retail investors, emphasized the importance of market fairness, and proposed learning from India's market experience by implementing different trading systems to protect retail investors' interests and prevent excessive harvesting by large institutions.

MaticHoleFiller

2026-03-13 07:22:36

Abstract generation in progress

Special Topic: Strengthening the Defense Line for the Rights and Interests of Small and Medium Investors — Sina Finance 3.15 Investor Protection Forum

Trading stocks? Check out Golden Kylin Analyst Reports—authoritative, professional, timely, comprehensive—helping you uncover potential thematic opportunities!

On March 13, Sina Finance held the 3.15 Investor Protection Forum. Liu Jipeng, Professor at the Business School of China University of Political Science and Law and a well-known expert in the capital market, delivered a keynote speech.

Liu Jipeng specifically emphasized the new challenges brought by quantitative trading. He believes this is not simply a matter of clear legal definitions but a fairness contest in a “blurred state.”

Liu Jipeng pointed out that quantitative firms leverage their advantages of “fast information” and “quick execution” to create “Type A” stock price movements—sharp rises and falls within days—causing retail investors following the trend to be repeatedly “harvested.”

“Quantitative trading pursues speed. Machines can be placed in the trading house servers; do retail investors have this capability? Do institutions have short-selling via margin or futures? Can retail investors do that?” Liu Jipeng’s questions are forceful.

He revealed that although regulatory authorities have taken measures to move quantitative firms’ servers out of trading house data centers, “real estate next to the exchanges is still appreciating,” because the physical proximity advantage still exists.

“Our market’s primary requirement is fairness and justice. We must not sacrifice the fairness of 95% of investors to gain efficiency for the remaining 5% of institutions.” He even proposed a bold idea: could we learn from the Indian market experience and give retail investors some “special treatment” in trading systems? For example, “T+0 for retail investors, T+1 for institutions,” to curb institutions from overharvesting through systemic advantages.

Sina Statement: This message is reproduced from Sina’s partner media. Sina.com publishes this article to disseminate more information and does not imply endorsement of its views or verification of its content. The article is for reference only and does not constitute investment advice. Investors operate at their own risk.

Massive information, precise analysis, all on Sina Finance APP

Editor: Chang Fuqiang

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.