Why Don’t Rogue Traders Ever Make Money?

Treason doth never proper. What’s the reason?
Why, if it prosper, none dare call it “treason.”

Does it strike you as strange that no big bank ever announces that it has made $2.3 billion in unauthorized trading? Somehow, “rogue” traders always wind up losing tons of money; they never seem to win.

This should be statistically impossible. Since risks are symmetric and transactions costs tiny, if there were really trading strategies that could reliably lose billions of dollars, you could make huge sums just by making the opposite bets.

This suggests to me that big banks only classify trading activity as “unauthorized” when it loses huge amounts of cash. Otherwise, they’re happy to quietly pocket the money. I’m curious how much of their reported earnings come from activity that would have resulted in the traders’ being marched off in handcuffs had the market gone the other way.

[Cross-posted at The Reality-Based Community]

Support Nonprofit Journalism

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really works—and how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, I’ll make a donation

Mark Kleiman

Mark Kleiman is a professor of public policy at the New York University Marron Institute.