With the convening of the two sessions imminent, some deputies proposed the implementation of a "T+0" trading system to promote the balance of investment and financing and market fairness.
His core point of view is that the "T+0" trading system should be implemented to deal with the shortcomings of the current T+1 system under the comprehensive registration system. Under the T+1 system, institutional investors can profit from ** fluctuations, while small and medium-sized investors cannot recover their losses, which is not conducive to market fairness and stability. It is recommended to gradually pilot T+0, starting with the blue chips on the main board, and extending it to the entire A-share sector when it matures, and strengthen risk supervision and investor suitability management. At the same time, the law should be strictly implemented, the supervision and accountability mechanism should be improved, illegal acts should be cracked down, and the cost of illegal activities should be increased.
His point of view is reasonable, but, at present, A shares are not suitable for the T+0 system, because it does not conform to China's national conditions, we know that compared with other countries, China's ** number is huge, institutions can use funds, information and other advantages, the ** as a counterparty, however, many ** do not have professional financial knowledge and timely information**, so they can only become the slaughtered "lamb".
Even if you start with **T+0, it won't help, institutional investors can still use other channels to achieve T+0 in disguise, and they can also use various tools such as stock index**, ETF arbitrage, margin trading, etc.
Some people say, can we learn from the Indian implementation agency T+3, **T+0? I think it doesn't seem to be feasible, because it will reduce the liquidity of market funds, although the ** group is huge, but it can't form a climate, and it is easy to make radical behaviors, causing **huge fluctuations, which is not conducive to regulation, think about it from another angle, institutional investors can also disguise themselves as **, isn't it? But, on the other hand, ** cannot be disguised as an institution.
To sum up, whether China implements the T+0 system, it is not of great significance, because the problem is not here, if you want to develop healthily, you can get better if you don't change a few systems, which is like what I said before, China has been like a "spoiled child" for so many years, and institutional investors continue to "benefit from life", and finally, it is really not like words.
In short, the road to reform is destined to be tortuous, and the task of the management is very arduous, not only to severely crack down on listed companies that violate laws and regulations, but also to supervise and punish investors who violate laws and regulations. I think that the most meaningful direction for reform should be to establish leveling, when there is a huge fluctuation, you can support the bottom, and not be in a passive state all the time, isn't it?
Ladies and gentlemen, what do you think about T+0? Welcome to leave a message below in the comment area, and let's discuss together!