[HN Gopher] SEC charges Netflix insider trading ring ___________________________________________________________________ SEC charges Netflix insider trading ring Author : hhs Score : 123 points Date : 2021-08-18 21:10 UTC (1 hours ago) (HTM) web link (www.sec.gov) (TXT) w3m dump (www.sec.gov) | khazhoux wrote: | Here's what I don't understand: How does knowing the growth | numbers actually translate into an actionable buy-or-sell plan? | To my naive eye, the market effect of key metrics always seems | fairly random. And besides, in recent memory, all the FAANGs have | been reporting positive numbers for all metrics, with just a few | exceptions. | | I mean it's like, here's my "insider tip": _FAANGs saw usage and | revenue growth this quarter_. Ok, now are you gonna make money | off this secret info? | RandallBrown wrote: | If growth numbers are higher than expected, you can buy stock | now before the numbers are released. When they announce the | true numbers, the stock will probably rise and you will make | money. | enchiridion wrote: | I've always thought that's because the stock has already moved | before earnings. So the day after earnings is just any other | day for the big players. | | It'd be interesting to look at correlation of a rolling average | with earnings call metrics. | clpm4j wrote: | "Sung Mo Jun, Joon Jun, and Chon allegedly used encrypted | messaging applications to discuss their trading in an attempt to | evade detection. According to the complaint, Sung Mo Jun, Joon | Jun, and Chon made approximately $3 million in total profits from | the illegal scheme. The SEC Market Abuse Unit's Analysis and | Detection Center uncovered the trading ring by using data | analysis tools to identify the traders' improbably successful | trading over time." | | I'm curious which messaging app they used. I also wonder if | someone tipped off the SEC or they just uncovered this in their | own analysis work - it doesn't seem like making $3m off Netflix | stock trades over a couple of years is particularly alarming on | the surface, but idk I'm not an expert... maybe the timing of the | buy orders and also looking into what other trades they were | making (if any) was easy to spot. | elliekelly wrote: | It's part of their new "EPS Initiative" where they use an | analytics tool called ARTEMIS (I forget what the acronym stands | for) to assign a risk score to certain transactions and | traders. It's interesting because although the SEC has been | pretty tight-lipped about the data inputs it appears there is | some degree of "who-you-know" factored into the risk score. So | two people can make the exact same trade at the exact same time | but if I have a close friend or family member affiliated with | Netflix and you don't then my trade will receive a higher risk | score. | | It's part of a broader change in the way the SEC approaches | insider trading. Previously they took an "issuer based" | approach where a big pop or loss in $ABC triggered a look at | all the trades in the right direction prior to the | announcement. Now they take a "trader based" approach where | they look at person's pattern of activity over time. | | So if your spouse or sibling works in M&A and tips you off to | potential deals so you can make (relatively) small investments | on the inside information the scheme will be flagged and | investigated much more quickly. | Trias11 wrote: | I don't think SEC has any encrypted messaging reading | capabilities but average guy suddenly making regular killing | on the market with the same stock does turn on red flags. | | And then it's a matter of connecting the dots - most often | the dots between the "lucky" guy and someone within the | company. | | Done. | notadog wrote: | ARTEMIS stands for the Advanced Relational Trading | Enforcement Metrics Investigation System. | antman wrote: | Also Artemis was the goddess of hunting in Ancient Greece. | [deleted] | hatsunearu wrote: | How do they know whose friends are friends with whoever else? | jedberg wrote: | Your public friends list on LinkedIn, Facebook, etc? | kyleee wrote: | I'm certain it's easier than basically any point in human | history to obtain such information from: intelligence | agencies, social media companies, data brokers/advertisers, | etc. | benatkin wrote: | Should have used Kakao. Guessing they used something based in | the US. | H8crilA wrote: | Some of these guys just buy weekly options ahead of an earnings | call, after a few hits it's basically screaming to some | statistical algorithm at the SEC "hey, please put me in jail!". | Digging up admissible evidence is harder, though. | vineyardmike wrote: | > Some of these guys just buy weekly options ahead of an | earnings call, | | Obviously working for the company in question makes it | different, but this doesn't seem crazy or unusual. | | I've worked placed where it was very easy to predict the | stock movements ahead of earnings call since the company's | success/failure is in public eye a lot (same true for | netflix?). | | The top 5 companies in terms of market cap get lots of | attention and analysis. I bet most people could review that | data before the earnings call and guess the movement of the | stock enough to make money. | | Again, i would never touch my companies stock on the market | but it doesn't seem like you need insider knowledge at a lot | of big companies. | fred_is_fred wrote: | >I bet most people could review that data before the | earnings call and guess the movement of the stock enough to | make money. | | If "most people" could do this, "most people" would. | H8crilA wrote: | _Then why aren 't you a multi-millionaire yet?_ One can | easily multiply their pot every 3 months playing a few | companies with simple option strategies, provided it's | really that predictable. More importantly, if this is | predictable then why is there volatility around earnings? | Surely enough people would have figured it out by now. | vineyardmike wrote: | > Then why aren't you a multi-millionaire yet? | | Well, as you said, not everything is a win, and sometimes | you lose. Some people don't have the money to deal with | options and handle a loss. | | But who said i wasn't a millionaire ;) | bpodgursky wrote: | Maybe one of them cracked. | droopyEyelids wrote: | They probably all cracked. | | The SEC could put them in a perfect "prisoner's dilemma" | game and we're only talking about regular people, not | hardened operators with like, a suicide capsule in their | molar. | H8crilA wrote: | Yeah. Reminder: if you witness something of this sort | consider using the SEC Whistleblower Office | (http://sec.gov/whistleblower). You'll get 10% - 30% of | the collected fines, and there's a cottage industry of | lawyers that will compile the case for you (or tell you | that you don't actually have a good case, which I heard | is actually common). | DaveExeter wrote: | Snitching is wrong. | H8crilA wrote: | It could be considered wrong, depending on your personal | ethics. That's why I wrote "consider". | socialist_coder wrote: | Do brokerages give all this info to the SEC so they can do | this type of analysis and then be able to personally identify | the buyers/sellers? | | It seems wrong that my personal info is being given out by my | brokerage, in a way that lets them identify my personal | trades. | skrtskrt wrote: | You're trading securities in the United States on a | registered exchange through a registered broker, it is all | _heavily_ monitored and regulated, to assume there would be | any sort of anonymity on a trade is delusional. | traceroute66 wrote: | >It seems wrong that my personal info is being given out by | my brokerage, in a way that lets them identify my personal | trades. | | Unlikely. | | More likely is that the brokerages and/or exchanges submit | transactional order-book trade data to the SEC (i.e. | anonymous numbers .... timestamps, quantity traded, | direction). | | If the SEC then spot something, its just a case of picking | up the phone to the brokerage and asking to ID the client | for the transaction at a given timestamp. | quickthrowman wrote: | What do you expect from SEC regulated markets/exchanges | with AML/KYC and heavy regulation? Anonymity? | fshbbdssbbgdd wrote: | Sometimes privacy has costs, so do the cost-benefit | analysis. What's more important, your privacy from some | investigator at the SEC who has access and abuses their | position, or the SEC's ability to detect insider trading? | haney wrote: | Talked with an SEC guy at a conference one time, they have | access to every order that touches any American exchange | (filled or not) in a huge data warehouse, apparently most | of this detection is just a series of SQL queries. | RobertoG wrote: | Inside trading of the information in that database would | be something! | cyral wrote: | You can buy access to every trade being made (executed or | not), but it won't have the information the SEC has like | your name attached to it or if it was an opening or | closing trade. | empraptor wrote: | Might be a regulation that brokerages have to comply with? | Seems like a reasonable solution if such regulation was | made in order to detect insider trading. | nojito wrote: | Trading information is essentially public. | | It's just a matter of finding suspicious trades to start an | investigation. | TuringNYC wrote: | Trading information is public (quotes and trades) but the | originating person/entity is not, so it would be hard to | detect this via the public trade log or quote book since | you couldnt see track records or profitability. | | That said, the SEC _does_ have access to the full dataset | including the person /entity making the trades. | np- wrote: | If you are trading on an SEC regulated exchange: | https://www.sec.gov/fast- | answers/divisionsmarketregmrexchang..., then yes the SEC | can see everything. | willdearden wrote: | Most trades through a brokerage don't make it on an | exchange. They're internalized by a wholesaler like | Citadel Securities. Which is the reason for the question. | alecst wrote: | Yea, possibly this plus messaging metadata. | artur_makly wrote: | do they get jail time? or just fines? | kevin_thibedeau wrote: | If they lie they get the Martha Stewart special which is | apparently harsher than an attempted coup. | codazoda wrote: | The article goes on to say that tools the SEC uses made the | success of the trades look improbable. | | The only fine I see listed is for about $72k. I can't tell if | the scheme was profitable or not because that was just one | person. I assume the others are going to trial, so we won't | know for a while. | hooloovoo_zoo wrote: | What's the penalty for this? If the total profits were 3M over | several years and at least 3 Netflix engineers were involved (who | combined would have made that much anyway over that period), it | seems awfully risky unless the penalty is trivial. | criloz2 wrote: | and with those Netflix salaries, it does not look that worth | the risk to begin with it | spoonjim wrote: | Crazy to lose your >$500K job and get a felony record for $3 | million in profit split among accomplices. | pcbro141 wrote: | A Chicago pharmacist just got charged for selling CDC | vaccination cards for $10 each for total $1250 in profit. Lost | his $100k+ job and faces at least a few years in prison. Crazy | what some people will risk for a little money. | | https://news.wttw.com/2021/08/17/chicago-pharmacist-arrested... | jonny_eh wrote: | Criminals don't expect to get caught. | elliekelly wrote: | NFL player Mychal Kendricks traded on insider information | provided by a friend working at Goldman Sachs to make just over | a million dollars. Kendricks got off fairly light and even kept | his job but it's nuts that two people in two _highly-coveted_ | and well-compensated positions would risk so much for such a | (relatively) small amount. Money makes people do stupid stuff, | I guess. | wjd2030 wrote: | Meanwhile members of congress continue to get rich using their | positions and its all good. | seriousquestion wrote: | Now that they got a small fish at Netflix, how about looking into | the whales in congress? | | https://unusualwhales.com/i_am_the_senate/congress | a-dub wrote: | important to keep in mind: if you work for a publicly traded | company and share mnpi without even realizing it and someone | trades on it (or perhaps something else) without even telling | you, you could _still_ face criminal liability. | whoisjuan wrote: | "This case reflects our continued use of sophisticated analytical | tools to detect, unravel and halt pernicious insider trading | schemes that involve multiple tippers, traders, and market | events." | | Lol, I don't think there's a lot of sophistication in this. They | want to make it sound like some sort of powerful magic box they | have that can find anyone doing something dubious when in reality | this is probably a very simple interesection between two | datasets: | | The one that contains all the people who yielded profits over X | amount when trading the stock of a Y company during a timeframe, | and another dataset that contains all the current and former | employees of that Y company. | | That's the thing about insider trading. People who do it are just | complete idiots. They think that they can leverage some assymetry | of information when in reality there's no such thing. If you | trade the stock of your current or former employer (especially | before earnings calls) and yield unrealistic gains you're going | to get flagged and someone is going to manually review your shit. | [deleted] | amelius wrote: | How about family members/friends of employees of Y company? | sakopov wrote: | > People who do it are complete idiots. | | US Senators would likely disagree with your assessment. [1] | | [1] https://unusualwhales.com/i_am_the_senate | pryce wrote: | So how would we expect people who want to evade that system to | react? | | A simple proposal they would quickly grasp is to have insider | trading but spread out over two or more companies, let's call | them ACME and Weyland-Yutani. They would have the Weyland- | Yutani employees make profit off insider info passed from ACME | employees, and have ACME employees make profits off insider | info passed from employees of Weyland-Yutani. I imagine they | would also want to prevent the groups involved from becoming | too large. | traceroute66 wrote: | > People who do it are just complete idiots. | | Exactly this. Especially in the 21st century world of big data, | ML algorithms and all that jazz. | | The closer you are to the action, the higher the chances of | getting caught. | | If you work for a finance firm, its pretty much guaranteed | you'll be caught. Firms are hot on it and they take all sorts | of layered measures to prevent it and stamp it out. If you work | for a finance firm, in most cases its actually harder to obtain | the insider information in the first place than it is to act on | it as a PA trade. One of the most well funded and well-staffed | departments in any finance firm is the compliance department | and they have the power to kill your career instantly (you'll | get escorted from the office the moment they suspect anything | and then you'll find _nobody_ in finance will employ someone | who was sacked for compliance reasons). | | If you work for a listed company, then like these guys | eventually found out, you'll be caught. A bit of data mining at | the SEC will soon weed out transactions made by people who | likely knew what was going on before the public did. | | All this hard work on compliance makes the stockmarket one of | the most even playing fields there is for investors, because | the work of the SEC and other regulators around the world is | there to ensure John Doe has the same chances as Warren Buffet | to make money on the stockmarket. (Yes, the world of HFT is a | bit different with their technological edge, but that's another | story). | dilyevsky wrote: | Your solution is easily sidestepped by trading through an | entity that can't be automatically traced to you. I'm pretty | sure it's more complicated than that and involves some form of | anomaly analysis involving high gains on low activity accounts | at suss timing | wil421 wrote: | Look at companies where stocks dip or rise a few days to the | day before earnings are announced. How does this happen if they | don't know something the general public or most other | investment firms don't know? | | Agreed that the people getting caught are dumb. Especially | making trades about your ex employer when you've already | started an insider trading ring. | cortesoft wrote: | > That's the thing about insider trading. People who do it are | just complete idiots. | | This is selection bias. The people who get CAUGHT doing it are | complete idiots. | whoisjuan wrote: | True! | bostonsre wrote: | Yea, I'd imagine if you have enough discipline (e.g. don't | use your family to make the trades) and use tradecraft well | (e.g. don't talk about it on slack or in text messages), it | should be possible to get away with it. It would be neat to | know how many hedgefunds do it and what process they follow | to do it. | skrtskrt wrote: | > The people who get CAUGHT doing it are complete idiots | | and/or greedy. | | Even if you're "smart" about it, you can only hit so many | lottery tickets before you come under suspicion. | | I'd bet the best way to get away with insider trading is to | do it once, make under $1 million, then walk the hell away | and never speak of it. | Kluny wrote: | The thing is, 1 million is a pretty cheap price to sell | your integrity. If you do get caught, you got caught over a | relatively small sum. Once you've gotten your hands dirty, | why not go all in? Why not go for James Bond villain money? | | That's not rational, of course, but humans aren't rational. | xvector wrote: | It is rational if the punishment for insider trading | stays relatively constant but the benefit increases with | money traded - which it probably does. | Retric wrote: | Insider information isn't guaranteed to let you predict the | stock price. You are much more likely to actually make | money with multiple small bets than any one big bet. | radicaldreamer wrote: | Yes, there have been several people charged with insider | trading who actually lost money on the trades. | skrtskrt wrote: | Good point - we'll file making negative money under "make | under $1 million". | | Even if you lost money the one time you did it, I'd | probably still recommend doing it approximately once. | rasz wrote: | Nah, the safest way involves relatives in politics. | skrtskrt wrote: | or just being a senator | cardosof wrote: | Bringing the big harpoons for the small fish. What about the | whales? ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-08-18 23:00 UTC)