Talk:Citadel LLC
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Citadel LLC article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
Archives: Index, 1Auto-archiving period: 90 days |
This article is of interest to multiple WikiProjects. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.
|
This article has been mentioned by a media organization:
|
Market maker
This section reads like an ad and should discuss the controversies over payment for order flow and high-frequency trading. For example, see:
https://www.ft.com/content/ee8d4ba0-d9a8-11e6-944b-e7eb37a6aa8e
https://www.ft.com/content/4a439398-88ab-442a-9927-e743a3ff609b
- Please update the article if so, however Reliable, verifiable, independent sources are required to support material added to articles. Please sign your talk page contributions with 4 tildes. Thanks. --Guiy de Montfort (talk) 12:13, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
Citadel and Apex clearing linked to GME short squeeze
There should be some acknowledgement of this based on RS
https://www.wsj.com/articles/citadel-point72-to-invest-2-75-billion-into-melvin-capital-management-11611604340 TuffStuffMcG (talk) 19:46, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
- nevermind, I see a short blurb since the page reset
TuffStuffMcG (talk) 19:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 29 January 2021
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Robinhood owned by Citadel LLC 71.241.203.144 (talk) 11:25, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
- It’s not, Citadel is the main market maker for Robinhood --Devokewater (talk) 11:29, 29 January 2021 (UTC)
Involvement in the Gamestop short squeeze of 2021
Nowhere does this article even mention the role Citadel played in what has become one of the largest news stories of the decade. This needs to be rectified ASAP! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.234.105 (talk) 17:48, 11 March 2021 (UTC)
Page Lock
I highly recommend this page get locked for the next few months. This kind of vandalism will occur repeatedly until the situation surrounding GameStop ($GME) resolves. TranceaddicT (talk) 21:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)
Wondering if there's not about to be a massive amount of vandalism coming in.
I'm not too familiar with Wikipedia's rules on locking things.
but it's probably going to be prudent to lock the article from editing for the next while. Until what's going on with gamestop blows over. Just think it would save a lot of work, possibly preventing an absurd amount of vandalism, from both sides of the 'fight'. 75.168.21.203 (talk) 03:17, 19 April 2021 (UTC)
Semi-protected edit request on 5 June 2021
This edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
Citadel is a known hedgefund which deals in naked shorts sellings of stocks. Citadel knows this is illegal but they do not care. They enjoy engaging in fraudulent activities to line their own pockets and bankrupt companies and make thousands of people jobless. 80.0.159.46 (talk) 13:52, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
- Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. lomrjyo(talk•contrib•Ping with {{u|Lomrjyo}}) 13
- 56, 5 June 2021 (UTC)
Illegal market manipulation
Definitly needs some parts about the 'supposed' *wink wink* illegal market manipulation during the AMC squeeze, such as naked shorting, FTD manipulation, FUD spreading in social media and news and at least some semi-illegal, shady moves like rerouting order flow through dark pools to fake selling pressure. ApeGladiator (talk) 15:43, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
- What are the reliable sources covering that information? Schazjmd (talk) 15:49, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
" Citadel Securities automation has resulted in more reliable trading at lower costs and with tighter spreads"
This is straight up lies, pr talk from Citadel to dupe unsuspecting customers, backed by an article clearly pushed by PFOF brokers too muddy the waters of "facts". — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sek3000 (talk • contribs) 13:48, 18 October 2021 (UTC)
Proposal to split out the section called Citadel Securities
I propose that the section called "Citadel Securities" be split off into a separate page also called "Citadel Securities" for the following reasons:
- Citadel Securities is a separate company from Citadel. Citadel Securities is a market maker, one of the largest in the world, while Citadel, the subject of this article, is an asset manager. It is confusing and inaccurate to feature a separate company (Citadel Securities) as a subset/division of another company, (Citadel), as is implied by the structure and content of this article.
- In addition, Citadel Securities can easily exist as a separate, stand-alone article since it passes Wikipedia standards for notability based on a prevalence of significant coverage in reliable sources. Here are a few examples of such coverage: https://www.ft.com/content/58dd7e9d-9483-4ec7-9fdf-1a45f373e8b5; https://www.wsj.com/articles/spotify-picks-citadel-securities-to-handle-debut-at-nyse-1520439264; https://qz.com/1969196/citadel-securities-gets-almost-as-much-trading-volume-as-nasdaq/
I have already created a draft of "Citadel Securities" in my userspace, found at User:Amandaatcitadel/Citadel Securities, which is identical to the current "Citadel Securities" section, except that I added an Infobox, a lead section with reliable sources, an External links section, and the correction of the founding date to 2002. I am notifying JBchrch who recently helped me with Ken Griffin's page. If there is anything else you need, please let me know. Amandaatcitadel (talk) 14:42, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
- Their was a recent article about Citadel in the FT, Citadel Securities is a seperate entity from the Hedge Fund business, it needs its own wikipage due to its size + prominence. --Devokewater (talk) 14:45, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. We generally do not spin off the securities division of big financial groups into separate articles: see Primary dealers § Current primary dealers with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York for a list of prominent examples. The applicable policy here is WP:PAGEDECIDE whose criteria, in my opinion, call for keeping everything in one article. However, I do concede that treating Citadel Securities as a sub-topic of Citadel "The Fund" is sub-optimal, so what I would suggest is to rebrand the article as "Citadel", i.e. a "financial group" comprising both an asset management arm and a market making/securities arm. JBchrch talk 14:58, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
- Citadel and Citadel Securities are separately run businesses that play different roles in the market, and the latter is not "the securities division" of the former. They are both subsidiaries of Citadel Enterprise Americas, LLC, a non-notable holding company. There are plenty of examples on Wikipedia of independently notable sister companies that merit their own standalone articles, such as HSBC Finance and HSBC Insurance; or GE Digital and GE Power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amandaatcitadel (talk • contribs) 15:29, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
- @Amandaatcitadel Thanks for your helpful comment. I understand the mechanics of mutual independence, and I also understand that you guys at PR need to make sure that public and the clients see these two companies as clearly separate. However, I'm not entirely convinced that this separation has reached the reliable sources yet. The latest FT article about the company begins by calling Ken Griffin
the founder of Citadel Securities and its related $35bn hedge fund Citadel
. The article then spends a lot of time explaining the evolving relationship between Citadel LLC, Citadel Securities and Ken Griffin. The FT and WSJ articles you linked also associate Citadel LLC and Citadel Securities (FT: "group", WSJ: "It was founded in 2002 by billionaire Ken Griffin, who also leads hedge fund Citadel LLC"). I also remember last year's House hearing, where Ken Griffin was called to testify as "Founder and CEO of Citadel and Founder and Principal Shareholder of Citadel Securities" [1]. I will admit that I'm seeing in the reliable sources (I've scanned FT, WSJ and Bloomberg) a tendency to address Citadel LLC and Citadel Securities separately and not as a monolithic group of companies (as opposed to UBS AG and UBS Securities for instance). I am open to changing my !vote if you can provide some reliable secondary sources that would address in more detail how the separation between the two companies and, specifically, to what extent Ken Griffin exercises (or doesn't exercise) a form of common control over the two companies. JBchrch talk 16:10, 3 February 2022 (UTC)- Hi JBchrch. I believe the following reliable secondary sources address your points above. The New York Times makes it quite clear these are two separate businesses.[1] NPR goes a bit further, stating that "Citadel runs a hedge fund..." and later says "But a separate business, also founded and majority-owned by Ken Griffin...is Citadel Securities..."[2] An article in the Financial Times addresses the role Griffin plays at Citadel Securities: "Peng Zhao, who joined Citadel in the mid-2000s and has run Citadel Securities since 2017, says Griffin’s influence is evident through the culture of the business, even if the founder is no longer involved in the “day to day” running of a company in which — according to regulatory disclosures — he owns a stake of at least 75 per cent."[3] I appreciate the time you have taken to discuss this.
- @Amandaatcitadel Thanks for your helpful comment. I understand the mechanics of mutual independence, and I also understand that you guys at PR need to make sure that public and the clients see these two companies as clearly separate. However, I'm not entirely convinced that this separation has reached the reliable sources yet. The latest FT article about the company begins by calling Ken Griffin
- Citadel and Citadel Securities are separately run businesses that play different roles in the market, and the latter is not "the securities division" of the former. They are both subsidiaries of Citadel Enterprise Americas, LLC, a non-notable holding company. There are plenty of examples on Wikipedia of independently notable sister companies that merit their own standalone articles, such as HSBC Finance and HSBC Insurance; or GE Digital and GE Power. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Amandaatcitadel (talk • contribs) 15:29, 3 February 2022 (UTC)
References
- ^ Phillips, Matt; Kelly, Kate (17 February 2021). "A Shadowy but Powerful Wall St. Firm Has Its Moment in Washington". New York Times.
- ^ Kailath, Ryan (4 February 2021). "Ken Griffin: The Hedge Fund Titan In The Middle Of The Reddit Investing Revolt". National Public Radio.
- ^ Rennison, Joe; Darbyshire, Madison; Stafford, Stefania (25 January 2022). "Citadel Securities: how the Wall Street outsider became 'the Amazon of financial markets'". Financial Times.
- Thank you. Amandaatcitadel (talk) 21:24, 9 February 2022 (UTC)
- Oppose. For the same reasoning that JBchrch lists and support the rebrand as "Citadel", i.e. a "financial group". WestportWiki (talk) 22:11, 2 February 2022 (UTC)
- Start-Class Chicago articles
- Low-importance Chicago articles
- WikiProject Chicago articles
- Start-Class company articles
- Low-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- Start-Class Finance & Investment articles
- Low-importance Finance & Investment articles
- WikiProject Finance & Investment articles
- Start-Class WikiProject Illinois articles
- Low-importance WikiProject Illinois articles
- WikiProject Private Equity articles
- Talk pages of subject pages with paid contributions
- Wikipedia pages referenced by the press