In the latest issue:

Real Men Go to Tehran

Adam Shatz

What Trump doesn’t know about Iran

Patrick Cockburn

Kaiser Karl V

Thomas Penn

The Hostile Environment

Catherine Hall

Social Mobilities

Adam Swift

Short Cuts: So much for England

Tariq Ali

What the jihadis left behind

Nelly Lahoud

Ray Strachey

Francesca Wade

C.J. Sansom

Malcolm Gaskill

At the British Museum: ‘Troy: Myth and Reality’

James Davidson

Poem: ‘The Lion Tree’

Jamie McKendrick

SurrogacyTM

Jenny Turner

Boys in Motion

Nicholas Penny

‘Trick Mirror’

Lauren Oyler

Diary: What really happened in Yancheng?

Long Ling

Just how fast?Donald MacKenzie
Close

Terms and Conditions

These terms and conditions of use refer to the London Review of Books and the London Review Bookshop website (www.lrb.co.uk — hereafter ‘LRB Website’). These terms and conditions apply to all users of the LRB Website ("you"), including individual subscribers to the print edition of the LRB who wish to take advantage of our free 'subscriber only' access to archived material ("individual users") and users who are authorised to access the LRB Website by subscribing institutions ("institutional users").

Each time you use the LRB Website you signify your acceptance of these terms and conditions. If you do not agree, or are not comfortable with any part of this document, your only remedy is not to use the LRB Website.


  1. By registering for access to the LRB Website and/or entering the LRB Website by whatever route of access, you agree to be bound by the terms and conditions currently prevailing.
  2. The London Review of Books ("LRB") reserves the right to change these terms and conditions at any time and you should check for any alterations regularly. Continued usage of the LRB Website subsequent to a change in the terms and conditions constitutes acceptance of the current terms and conditions.
  3. The terms and conditions of any subscription agreements which educational and other institutions have entered into with the LRB apply in addition to these terms and conditions.
  4. You undertake to indemnify the LRB fully for all losses damages and costs incurred as a result of your breaching these terms and conditions.
  5. The information you supply on registration to the LRB Website shall be accurate and complete. You will notify the LRB promptly of any changes of relevant details by emailing the registrar. You will not assist a non-registered person to gain access to the LRB Website by supplying them with your password. In the event that the LRB considers that you have breached the requirements governing registration, that you are in breach of these terms and conditions or that your or your institution's subscription to the LRB lapses, your registration to the LRB Website will be terminated.
  6. Each individual subscriber to the LRB (whether a person or organisation) is entitled to the registration of one person to use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site. This user is an 'individual user'.
  7. The London Review of Books operates a ‘no questions asked’ cancellation policy in accordance with UK legislation. Please contact us to cancel your subscription and receive a full refund for the cost of all unposted issues.
  8. Use of the 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is strictly for the personal use of each individual user who may read the content on the screen, download, store or print single copies for their own personal private non-commercial use only, and is not to be made available to or used by any other person for any purpose.
  9. Each institution which subscribes to the LRB is entitled to grant access to persons to register on and use the 'subscriber only' content on the web site under the terms and conditions of its subscription agreement with the LRB. These users are 'institutional users'.
  10. Each institutional user of the LRB may access and search the LRB database and view its entire contents, and may also reproduce insubstantial extracts from individual articles or other works in the database to which their institution's subscription provides access, including in academic assignments and theses, online and/or in print. All quotations must be credited to the author and the LRB. Institutional users are not permitted to reproduce any entire article or other work, or to make any commercial use of any LRB material (including sale, licensing or publication) without the LRB's prior written permission. Institutions may notify institutional users of any additional or different conditions of use which they have agreed with the LRB.
  11. Users may use any one computer to access the LRB web site 'subscriber only' content at any time, so long as that connection does not allow any other computer, networked or otherwise connected, to access 'subscriber only' content.
  12. The LRB Website and its contents are protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights. You acknowledge that all intellectual property rights including copyright in the LRB Website and its contents belong to or have been licensed to the LRB or are otherwise used by the LRB as permitted by applicable law.
  13. All intellectual property rights in articles, reviews and essays originally published in the print edition of the LRB and subsequently included on the LRB Website belong to or have been licensed to the LRB. This material is made available to you for use as set out in paragraph 8 (if you are an individual user) or paragraph 10 (if you are an institutional user) only. Save for such permitted use, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt such material in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department.
  14. All intellectual property rights in images on the LRB Website are owned by the LRB except where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited. Save for such material taken for permitted use set out above, you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, post, reproduce, translate or adapt LRB’s images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the LRB. To obtain such permission and the terms and conditions applying, contact the Rights and Permissions department. Where another copyright holder is specifically attributed or credited you may not download, store, disseminate, republish, reproduce or translate such images in whole or in part in any form without the prior written permission of the copyright holder. The LRB will not undertake to supply contact details of any attributed or credited copyright holder.
  15. The LRB Website is provided on an 'as is' basis and the LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website will be accessible by any particular browser, operating system or device.
  16. The LRB makes no express or implied representation and gives no warranty of any kind in relation to any content available on the LRB Website including as to the accuracy or reliability of any information either in its articles, essays and reviews or in the letters printed in its letter page or material supplied by third parties. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) arising from the publication of any materials on the LRB Website or incurred as a consequence of using or relying on such materials.
  17. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability of any kind (including liability for any losses, damages or costs) for any legal or other consequences (including infringement of third party rights) of any links made to the LRB Website.
  18. The LRB is not responsible for the content of any material you encounter after leaving the LRB Website site via a link in it or otherwise. The LRB gives no warranty as to the accuracy or reliability of any such material and to the fullest extent permitted by law excludes all liability that may arise in respect of or as a consequence of using or relying on such material.
  19. This site may be used only for lawful purposes and in a manner which does not infringe the rights of, or restrict the use and enjoyment of the site by, any third party. In the event of a chat room, message board, forum and/or news group being set up on the LRB Website, the LRB will not undertake to monitor any material supplied and will give no warranty as to its accuracy, reliability, originality or decency. By posting any material you agree that you are solely responsible for ensuring that it is accurate and not obscene, defamatory, plagiarised or in breach of copyright, confidentiality or any other right of any person, and you undertake to indemnify the LRB against all claims, losses, damages and costs incurred in consequence of your posting of such material. The LRB will reserve the right to remove any such material posted at any time and without notice or explanation. The LRB will reserve the right to disclose the provenance of such material, republish it in any form it deems fit or edit or censor it. The LRB will reserve the right to terminate the registration of any person it considers to abuse access to any chat room, message board, forum or news group provided by the LRB.
  20. Any e-mail services supplied via the LRB Website are subject to these terms and conditions.
  21. You will not knowingly transmit any virus, malware, trojan or other harmful matter to the LRB Website. The LRB gives no warranty that the LRB Website is free from contaminating matter, viruses or other malicious software and to the fullest extent permitted by law disclaims all liability of any kind including liability for any damages, losses or costs resulting from damage to your computer or other property arising from access to the LRB Website, use of it or downloading material from it.
  22. The LRB does not warrant that the use of the LRB Website will be uninterrupted, and disclaims all liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred as a result of access to the LRB Website being interrupted, modified or discontinued.
  23. The LRB Website contains advertisements and promotional links to websites and other resources operated by third parties. While we would never knowingly link to a site which we believed to be trading in bad faith, the LRB makes no express or implied representations or warranties of any kind in respect of any third party websites or resources or their contents, and we take no responsibility for the content, privacy practices, goods or services offered by these websites and resources. The LRB excludes to the fullest extent permitted by law all liability for any damages or losses arising from access to such websites and resources. Any transaction effected with such a third party contacted via the LRB Website are subject to the terms and conditions imposed by the third party involved and the LRB accepts no responsibility or liability resulting from such transactions.
  24. The LRB disclaims liability to the fullest extent permitted by law for any damages, losses or costs incurred for unauthorised access or alterations of transmissions or data by third parties as consequence of visit to the LRB Website.
  25. While 'subscriber only' content on the LRB Website is currently provided free to subscribers to the print edition of the LRB, the LRB reserves the right to impose a charge for access to some or all areas of the LRB Website without notice.
  26. These terms and conditions are governed by and will be interpreted in accordance with English law and any disputes relating to these terms and conditions will be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales.
  27. The various provisions of these terms and conditions are severable and if any provision is held to be invalid or unenforceable by any court of competent jurisdiction then such invalidity or unenforceability shall not affect the remaining provisions.
  28. If these terms and conditions are not accepted in full, use of the LRB Website must be terminated immediately.
Close
Vol. 41 No. 5 · 7 March 2019

Just how fast?

Donald MacKenzie on the increasing speed of high-frequency trading

About​ half of all buying and selling on many of the world’s crucial financial markets is now automated high-frequency trading. HFT is ultrafast. Whenever I speak to someone who might know and be prepared to tell me, I ask them just how fast that currently is: in other words, what’s the minimum time interval between the arrival of a ‘signal’ – a pattern of market data that feeds into an HFT algorithm – and an HFT system responding to the signal by sending an order to buy or sell, or cancelling an existing order? When I first asked, in 2011, the answer was five microseconds: five millionths of a second. At the time, that seemed extraordinarily fast, but now it seems leisurely. Data released last September by Eurex, Europe’s leading futures exchange, indicated that the speed is now 84 nanoseconds (billionths of a second): sixty times faster than it was in 2011.

In a nanosecond, the fastest possible signal – light in free space – travels just thirty centimetres, or roughly a foot. That’s the fundamental physical limit now shaping what we might call the infrastructure of financial capitalism. HFT’s closeness to that limit creates a situation in which the process is exquisitely sensitive to the technology used to transmit signals and above all to where exactly – very exactly – the technical devices involved are located. The most prominent recent addition to this array of devices is a tower – essentially a large pylon – in the grounds of the Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s computer datacentre, which is in the city’s outer suburbs. At just over 100 metres tall, it looms over the low-rise buildings of the datacentre. It is designed to carry microwave dishes, though they weren’t yet in place when I gazed up at it in October. Those dishes are going to provide the fastest form of communication between the tens of thousands of computer systems packed into the CME’s datacentre and the outside world.

The CME is the world’s most important financial exchange, with no real rival in the US or internationally. It trades ‘futures’, which began as standardised contracts between two participants essentially equivalent to one of them agreeing to buy, and the other to sell, a set quantity of a commodity such as grain on a given future date, at a price agreed today. You might think that the price of a futures contract on grain would track the price of the underlying physical commodity, but it’s actually the other way round: the concentration of buying and selling activity in futures markets means that the price of commodities is often in effect set in those markets, not in the direct buying and selling of the commodities themselves.

That’s also largely the case with the financial futures that the CME began to trade from the 1970s onwards. Their prices often move a fraction of a second before the prices of the underlying shares, bonds or currencies. In addition, price movements in the US – especially in the CME’s share-index futures and government-bond futures – frequently lead those in Europe, Asia and Latin America. That makes the speed at which price data from the CME are received hugely important to the world’s automated trading systems.

Fast transmission of price data used to involve fibre-optic cable, but the strands in such cables are made of materials (usually a specialised form of glass) which slow light down to around two-thirds of its speed in free space. In contrast, microwave and other wireless signals travel through the atmosphere at nearly full light speed.* Since 2010, no fewer than 17 competing microwave links have been built to connect the CME’s datacentre in suburban Chicago to the datacentres in northern New Jersey in which shares, US Treasury bonds and currencies are traded. Fierce competition has, however, winnowed out the slower links, and now only three firms remain in the race. (A fourth competitor may be about to emerge: it seems a new network is being built by Scientel, a specialist telecommunications firm with origins in the nuclear power sector. Scientel is probably doing this for an undisclosed HFT client, but I haven’t been able to discover whether that’s actually the case or who the client may be.)

Chicago’s outer suburbs are not a tourist destination. There are logistics depots, light industrial plants and scrubby vegetation; the landscape is flat and often dominated by power lines and freeways. If you’re involved in the microwave speed race, however, you will have had to get to know the patch of landscape immediately surrounding the CME datacentre intimately. The CME didn’t allow the three competing firms to install microwave dishes directly on the roof of the datacentre, so instead they were placed on towers several hundred metres away. Until quite recently, this meant that the crucial signals from the CME – and, though they tend not to be quite as important, the market data that flow from other exchanges to the CME – were slowed, perhaps by as much as a microsecond, by having to get from the datacentre to one of these towers (or vice versa) via a fibre-optic cable.

There was a considerable stir, therefore, in May 2017 when the financial news service Bloomberg published a photograph of a diesel generator in a field beside the road that runs along the north side of the CME datacentre. Connected to the generator was a short pole carrying two small antennae. That the two antennae were facing slightly upwards gave the game away: it was an ‘uplink’, which could transmit microwave signals to, and receive signals from, a nearby microwave tower. Bloomberg revealed that a company affiliated to Jump Trading (a leading HFT firm) had paid $14 million for the field. Having an uplink just across the road from the datacentre means that the length of fibre-optic cable through which a signal needs to run is reduced from hundreds to tens of metres, thus saving that crucial microsecond. The other two competitors in the race for speed have now constructed their own uplinks close to the datacentre: they had no alternative, because that microsecond is the difference between success and failure.

I am told that Jump intended to recoup much of the field’s purchase price by reselling all but the small portion of it needed for the uplink. I hope for their sake they were quick about it, because the new tower – which, as I’ve said, is inside the grounds of the datacentre and so at least thirty metres closer to it than any of the uplinks – will have considerably reduced the value of the surrounding land. Each of the firms that compete to have the fastest Chicago-New Jersey link will have no real choice but to install microwave dishes on the tower. I’m told they have been promised that the cables from their dish into the datacentre will be of the same length wherever their dish is placed on the tower. I haven’t been able to discover the prices they’re going to be charged – the tower belongs not to the CME but to the datacentre owner – but it’s clear that they’re going to have to pay them.

Europe’s equivalent of the Chicago-New Jersey route is the succession of microwave links between Frankfurt – where Eurex is based, along with most of the trading of German shares – and Greater London, where most of the rest of Europe’s share trading and nearly all of its foreign-exchange trading takes place. (The electronic trading of Eurozone sovereign bonds that currently takes place in London is going to move to a datacentre in Milan, at least if Brexit goes ahead.) There is a similar competition in speed on the London-Frankfurt route as on the one from Chicago to New Jersey, and the same three firms are in competition in Europe. (The race has been documented in remarkable detail by the researcher Alexandre Laumonier in a blog that has been hugely popular in the world of high-frequency trading.) Europe’s geography, though, has exposed the chief limitation of microwaves for use in trading: it is a line-of-sight technology. There has to be an uninterrupted straight line between each successive dish in a microwave link and the dishes before and after it. The curvature of the Earth therefore limits the distance between microwave towers.

That’s a real problem when it comes to the sea crossing from southern England to the Continent. The shortest path (the ‘geodesic’) between London and Frankfurt crosses the east coast of Kent near Richborough, a point at which the crossing is too long to be achievable with standard microwave towers. (Lake Michigan is a challenge, but less so, for the Chicago-New Jersey links.) In 2016, two HFT-owned microwave companies applied for planning permission to build 300-metre masts – three times as tall as the CME tower, as high as the Shard or the Eiffel Tower – on the Kent coast near Richborough to establish a line of sight that would make a geodesic-hugging link to the Continent feasible. Unsurprisingly, in 2017 Dover District Council turned down their applications, so as things stand the three competing microwave links have to deviate from the geodesic and cross the Channel further south, closer to the narrow Dover Straits, at a cost in speed of around ten microseconds.

The English Channel is an obstacle to microwave signals, but the world’s oceans are a currently insuperable barrier. There have been proposals to suspend microwave dishes from balloons, or have them carried by ships, helicopters or drones, but so far none has been adopted. The crucial signals from US datacentres to Europe still travel by fibre-optic cables on the Atlantic seabed. So far as Brexit is concerned, that is perhaps fortunate. Hibernia Atlantic’s cable, which is the fastest, makes landfall near Brean on the Bristol Channel, which means that signals from the CME reach London a thousandth of a second or so before they get to Frankfurt and the other financial centres on the Continent. That just might give London a continuing slender advantage as a centre of trading.

A competitor to submarine cables is, however, starting to emerge. Over the last couple of years, one of the contributors to Laumonier’s blog has been an engineer, Bob Van Valzah, who is a keen cyclist and lives in the Chicago suburbs. On his outings, he began to notice the appearance of new shortwave radio antennae. Like microwave, shortwave is an old technology: it’s what Radio Moscow used to use, and the Voice of America and BBC World Service still rely on it in some parts of the world. The point of shortwave is that at least a small portion of a radio signal in that frequency band will often bounce back to the Earth’s surface from the ionosphere, the layer high in the atmosphere in which electrons can be stripped from molecules in the atmosphere by the sun’s rays or cosmic radiation. Shortwave signals are therefore not restricted to a line of sight: they can travel over the horizon, sometimes for thousands of kilometres – potentially across the Atlantic, for example.

The new antennae spotted by Van Valzah are almost certainly being used to find out if shortwave might work in transoceanic HFT. Shortwave’s bandwidth is very limited, but the critical signals for trading are often extremely simple: you don’t need many binary digits to convey the fact that the price of a futures contract on the CME has ticked up or ticked down. The problem is that shortwave is a fickle technology, affected by conditions in the upper atmosphere, by solar flares, and even by whether it’s day or night. If in your youth you used to listen to shortwave radio stations in distant countries, you will have experienced the effects: a station you could hear clearly one night could be inaudible a day later.

With skilled planning and sufficiently powerful transmitters, shortwave signals will probably manage to reach London and Frankfurt from Chicago, much of the time at least. But what about Mumbai, Singapore, Hong Kong, Shanghai or Tokyo? Shortwave is unlikely ever to make direct transmission over those distances feasible. This potentially brings satellites into the picture. The cost of launching them is coming down sharply, and satellites could become a faster alternative to transoceanic cables. When I first heard discussion of this, I was sceptical. A whole constellation of satellites would be required: you can’t use a single geostationary satellite, since it would have to be more than 30,000 km above the surface of the Earth, and that would make a signal transmitted by satellite slower than one travelling by undersea cable.

What changed my mind was talking to two people in the industry whom I know not to be dreamers but serious people who actually build things. One of them led the construction of the earliest Chicago-New Jersey microwave link; the other has built several impressively fast links. Both have been doing research on the geometry of the problem (the low-Earth-orbit satellites required constantly change position with respect to the Earth) and its economics. Both think that a global network of a hundred or more satellites, constantly passing financial signals among themselves, is technologically feasible and potentially within the budget of the world’s HFT firms. It may not happen even so, but initially there were sceptics about microwave transmission and these two people proved them wrong. I wouldn’t be entirely surprised if, before too long, a world-girdling satellite network became part of the infrastructure of finance.

Send Letters To:

The Editor
London Review of Books,
28 Little Russell Street
London, WC1A 2HN

letters@lrb.co.uk

Please include name, address, and a telephone number.

Read anywhere with the London Review of Books app, available now from the App Store for Apple devices, Google Play for Android devices and Amazon for your Kindle Fire.

Sign up to our newsletter

For highlights from the latest issue, our archive and the blog, as well as news, events and exclusive promotions.