Hacker News Reader

Citadel is generally a bad example to use, as it’s exceptionally likely their performance is at least partially due to tax shuffling shenanigans and other regulatory violations. One can infer this because it’s exceptionally unlikely for them to have that performance even as an outlier using legitimate means

View on HN

Do you not understand the concept of high frequency trading? Citadel is a market maker, there is nothing sinister or shady about how they make money. It’s all done in accordance with the law and reported quarterly.

Do you have any proof of this outside of anonymous WSB posts?

It’s based on the fact that their reported returns are so absurdly far on the long-tail of being an outlier as to suggest there is more to it than “they’re just good.” I don’t know for sure—but it’s close enough that I’d bet a lot of my own 7-figure net worth on it.

Also, I only know of WSB from articles I’ve read: your implication is rude and uncharitable at best.

So, no proof then?

Also, your implication that a company is performing illegal activity just because they're successful is rude and uncharitable at best.

Then it’s not based on any fact..

Reply on news.ycombinator.com