Connect with us

Commodities

Escobar: ‘Samarkand Spirit’ To Be Driven By “Responsible Powers” Russia & China

Escobar: ‘Samarkand Spirit’ To Be Driven By "Responsible Powers" Russia & China

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

The SCO summit of Asian power…

Published

on

Escobar: 'Samarkand Spirit' To Be Driven By "Responsible Powers" Russia & China

Authored by Pepe Escobar,

The SCO summit of Asian power players delineated a road map for strengthening the multipolar world...

Amidst serious tremors in the world of geopolitics, it is so fitting that this year’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) heads of state summit should have taken place in Samarkand – the ultimate Silk Road crossroads for 2,500 years.

When in 329 BC Alexander the Great reached the then Sogdian city of Marakanda, part of the Achaemenid empire, he was stunned: “Everything I have heard about Samarkand it’s true, except it is even more beautiful than I had imagined.”

Fast forward to an Op-Ed by Uzbekistan’s President Shavkat Mirziyoyev published ahead of the SCO summit, where he stresses how Samarkand now “can become a platform that is able to unite and reconcile states with various foreign policy priorities.”

After all, historically, the world from the point of view of the Silk Road landmark has always been “perceived as one and indivisible, not divided. This is the essence of a unique phenomenon – the ‘Samarkand spirit’.”

And here Mirziyoyev ties the “Samarkand Spirit” to the original SCO “Shanghai Spirit” established in early 2001, a few months before the events of September 11, when the world was forced into strife and endless war, almost overnight.

All these years, the culture of the SCO has been evolving in a distinctive Chinese way. Initially, the Shanghai Five were focused on fighting terrorism – months before the US war of terror (italics mine) metastasized from Afghanistan to Iraq and beyond.

Over the years, the initial “three no’s” – no alliance, no confrontation, no targeting any third party – ended up equipping a fast, hybrid vehicle whose ‘four wheels’ are ‘politics, security, economy, and humanities,’ complete with a Global Development Initiative, all of which contrast sharply with the priorities of a hegemonic, confrontational west.

Arguably the biggest takeaway of this week’s Samarkand summit is that Chinese President Xi Jinping presented China and Russia, together, as “responsible global powers” bent on securing the emergence of multipolarity, and refusing the arbitrary “order” imposed by the United States and its unipolar worldview.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov pronounced Xi’s bilateral conversation with President Vladimir Putin as “excellent.” Xi Jinping, previous to their meeting, and addressing Putin directly, had already stressed the common Russia-China objectives:

“In the face of the colossal changes of our time on a global scale, unprecedented in history, we are ready with our Russian colleagues to set an example of a responsible world power and play a leading role in order to put such a rapidly changing world on the trajectory of sustainable and positive development.”

Later, in the preamble to the heads of state meeting, Xi went straight to the point: it is important to “prevent attempts by external forces to organize ‘color revolutions’ in the SCO countries.” Well, Europe wouldn’t be able to tell, because it has been color-revolutionized non-stop since 1945.

Putin, for his part, sent a message that will be ringing all across the Global South: “Fundamental transformations have been outlined in world politics and economics, and they are irreversible.” (italics mine)

Iran: it’s showtime

Iran was the guest star of the Samarkand show, officially embraced as the 9th member of the SCO. President Ebrahim Raisi, significantly, stressed before meeting Putin that “Iran does not recognize sanctions against Russia.” Their strategic partnership will be enhanced. On the business front, a hefty delegation comprising leaders of 80 large Russian companies will be visiting Tehran next week.

The increasing Russia-China-Iran interpolation – the three top drivers of Eurasia integration – scares the hell out of the usual suspects, who may be starting to grasp how the SCO represents, in the long run, a serious challenge to their geoeconomic game. So, as every grain of sand in every Heartland desert is already aware, the geopolitical pressure against the trio will increase exponentially.

And then there was the mega-crucial Samarkand trilateral: Russia-China-Mongolia. There were no official leaks, but this trio arguably discussed the Power of Siberia-2 gas pipeline – the interconnector to be built across Mongolia; and Mongolia’s enhanced role in a crucial Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) connectivity corridor, now that China is not using the Trans-Siberian route for exports to Europe because of sanctions.

Putin briefed Xi on all aspects of Russia’s Special Military Operation (SMO) in Ukraine, and arguably answered some really tough questions, many of them circulating wildly on the Chinese web for months now.

Which brings us to Putin’s presser at the end of the summit – with virtually all questions predictably revolving around the military theater in Ukraine.

The key takeaway from the Russian president: “There are no changes on the SMO plan. The main tasks are being implemented.” On peace prospects, it is Ukraine that “is not ready to talk to Russia.” And overall, “it is regrettable that the west had the idea to use Ukraine to try to collapse Russia.”

On the fertilizer soap opera, Putin remarked, “food supply, energy supply, they (the west) created these problems, and now are trying to resolve them at the expense of someone else” – meaning the poorest nations. “European countries are former colonial powers and they still have this paradigm of colonial philosophy. The time has come to change their behavior, to become more civilized.”

On his meeting with Xi Jinping: “It was just a regular meeting, it’s been quite some time we haven’t had a meeting face to face.” They talked about how to “expand trade turnover” and circumvent the “trade wars caused by our so-called partners,” with “expansion of settlements in national currencies not progressing as fast as we want.”

Strenghtening multipolarity

Putin’s bilateral with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi could not have been more cordial – on a “very special friendship” register – with Modi calling for serious solutions to the food and fuel crises, actually addressing the west. Meanwhile, the State Bank of India will be opening special rupee accounts to handle Russia-related trade.

This is Xi’s first foreign trip since the Covid pandemic. He could do it because he’s totally confident of being awarded a third term during the Communist Party Congress next month in Beijing. Xi now controls and/or has allies placed in at least 90 percent of the Politburo.

The other serious reason was to recharge the appeal of BRI in close connection to the SCO. China’s ambitious BRI project was officially launched by Xi in Astana (now Nur-Sultan) nine years ago. It will remain the overarching Chinese foreign policy concept for decades ahead.

BRI’s emphasis on trade and connectivity ties in with the SCO’s evolving multilateral cooperation mechanisms, congregating nations focusing on economic development independent from the hazy, hegemonic “rules-based order.” Even India under Modi is having second thoughts about relying on western blocs, where New Delhi is at best a neo-colonized “partner.”

So Xi and Putin, in Samarkand, for all practical purposes delineated a road map for strengthening multipolarity – as stressed by the final  Samarkand declaration  signed by all SCO members.

The Kazakh puzzle 

There will be bumps on the road aplenty. It’s no accident that Xi started his trip in Kazakhstan – China’s mega-strategic western rear, sharing a very long border with Xinjiang. The tri-border at the dry port of Khorgos – for lorries, buses and trains, separately – is quite something, an absolutely key BRI node.

The administration of President Kassym-Jomart Tokayev in Nur-Sultan (soon to be re-named Astana again) is quite tricky, swinging between eastern and western political orientations, and infiltrated by Americans as much as during the era of predecessor Nursultan Nazarbayev, Kazakhstan’s first post-USSR president.

Earlier this month, for instance, Nur-Sultan, in partnership with Ankara and British Petroleum (BP) – which virtually rules Azerbaijan – agreed to increase the volume of oil on the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) pipeline to up to 4 million tons a month by the end of this year. Chevron and ExxonMobil, very active in Kazakhstan, are part of the deal.

The avowed agenda of the usual suspects is to “ultimately disconnect the economies of Central Asian countries from the Russian economy.” As Kazakhstan is a member not only of the Russian-led Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU), but also the BRI, it is fair to assume that Xi – as well as Putin – discussed some pretty serious issues with Tokayev, told him to grasp which way the wind is blowing, and advised him to keep the internal political situation under control (see the aborted coup in January, when Tokayev was de facto saved by the Russian-led Collective Security Treaty Organization [CSTO]).

There’s no question Central Asia, historically known as a “box of gems” at the center of the Heartland, striding the Ancient Silk Roads and blessed with immense natural wealth – fossil fuels, rare earth metals, fertile agrarian lands – will be used by the usual suspects as a Pandora’s box, releasing all manner of toxic tricks against legitimate Eurasian integration.

That’s in sharp contrast with West Asia, where Iran in the SCO will turbo-charge its key role of crossroads connectivity between Eurasia and Africa, in connection with the BRI and the International North-South Transportation Corridor (INSTC).

So it’s no wonder that the UAE, Bahrain and Kuwait, all in West Asia, do recognize which way the wind is blowing. The three Persian Gulf states received official SCO ‘partner status’ in Samarkand, alongside the Maldives and Myanmar.

A cohesion of goals

Samarkand also gave an extra impulse to integration along the Russian-conceptualized Greater Eurasia Partnership  – which includes the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) – and that, just two weeks after the game-changing Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) held in Vladivostok, on Russia’s strategic Pacific coast.

Moscow’s priority at the EAEU is to implement a union-state with Belarus (which looks bound to become a new SCO member before 2024), side-by-side with closer integration with the BRI. Serbia, Singapore and Iran have trade agreements with the EAEU too.

The Greater Eurasian Partnership was proposed by Putin in 2015 – and it’s getting sharper as the EAEU commission, led by Sergey Glazyev, actively designs a new financial system, based on gold and natural resources and counter-acting the Bretton Woods system. Once the new framework is ready to be tested, the key disseminator is likely to be the SCO.

So here we see in play the full cohesion of goals – and the interaction mechanisms – deployed by the Greater Eurasia Partnership, BRI, EAEU, SCO, BRICS+ and the INSTC. It’s a titanic struggle to unite all these organizations and take into account the geoeconomic priorities of each member and associate partner, but that’s exactly what’s happening, at breakneck speed.

In this connectivity feast, practical imperatives range from fighting local bottlenecks to setting up complex multi-party corridors – from the Caucasus to Central Asia, from Iran to India, everything discussed in multiple roundtables.

Successes are already notable: from Russia and Iran introducing direct settlements in rubles and rials, to Russia and China increasing their trade in rubles and yuan to 20 percent – and counting. An Eastern Commodity Exchange may be soon established in Vladivostok to facilitate trade in futures and derivatives with the Asia-Pacific.

China is the undisputed primary creditor/investor in infrastructure across Central Asia. Beijing’s priorities may be importing gas from Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan and oil from Kazakhstan, but connectivity is not far behind.

The $5 billion construction of the 600 km-long Pakistan-Afghanistan-Uzbekistan (Pakafuz) railway will deliver cargo from Central Asia to the Indian Ocean in only three days instead of 30. And that railway will be linked to Kazakhstan and the already in progress 4,380 km-long Chinese-built railway from Lanzhou to Tashkent, a BRI project.

Nur-Sultan is also interested in a Turkmenistan-Iran-Türkiye railway, which would connect its port of Aktau on the Caspian Sea with the Persian Gulf and the Mediterranean Sea.

Türkiye, meanwhile, still a SCO observer and constantly hedging its bets, slowly but surely is trying to strategically advance its own Pax Turcica, from technological development to defense cooperation, all that under a sort of politico-economic-security package. Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan did discuss it in Samarkand with Putin, as the latter later announced that 25 percent of Russian gas bought by Ankara will be paid in rubles.

Welcome to Great Game 2.0

Russia, even more than China, knows that the usual suspects are going for broke. In 2022 alone, there was a failed coup in Kazakhstan in January; troubles in Badakhshan, in Tajikistan, in May; troubles in Karakalpakstan in Uzbekistan in June; the non-stop border clashes between Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan (both presidents, in Samarkand, at least agreed on a ceasefire and to remove troops from their borders).

And then there is recently-liberated Afghanistan – with no less than 11 provinces crisscrossed by ISIS-Khorasan and its Tajik and Uzbek associates. Thousands of would-be Heartland jihadis have made the trip to Idlib in Syria and then back to Afghanistan – ‘encouraged’ by the usual suspects, who will use every trick under the sun to harass and ‘isolate’ Russia from Central Asia.

So Russia and China should be ready to be involved in a sort of immensely complex, rolling Great Game 2.0 on steroids, with the US/NATO fighting united Eurasia and Turkiye in the middle.

On a brighter note, Samarkand proved that at least consensus exists among all the players at different institutional organizations that: technological sovereignty will determine sovereignty; and that regionalization – in this case Eurasian – is bound to replace US-ruled globalization.

These players also understand that the Mackinder and Spykman era is coming to a close – when Eurasia was ‘contained’ in a semi-disassembled shape so western maritime powers could exercise total domination, contrary to the national interests of Global South actors.

It’s now a completely different ball game. As much as the Greater Eurasia Partnership is fully supported by China, both favor the interconnection of BRI and EAEU projects, while the SCO shapes a common environment.

Yes, this is an Eurasian civilizational project for the 21st century and beyond. Under the aegis of the ‘Spirit of Samarkand.’

Tyler Durden Sat, 09/17/2022 - 23:30

Read More

Continue Reading

Government

Biden’s Secret Promise To OPEC Backfires: Shellenberger

Biden’s Secret Promise To OPEC Backfires: Shellenberger

Submitted by Michael Shellenberger,

In early September, United States Secretary of…

Published

on

Biden's Secret Promise To OPEC Backfires: Shellenberger

Submitted by Michael Shellenberger,

In early September, United States Secretary of Energy, Jennifer Granholm, told Reuters that President Joe Biden was considering extending the release of oil from America’s emergency stockpiles, the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), through October, and thus beyond the date when the program had been set to end. But then, a few hours later, an official with the Department of Energy called Reuters and contradicted Granholm, saying that the White House was not, in fact, considering more SPR releases. Five days later, the White House said it was considering refilling the SPR, thereby proposing to do the exact opposite of what Granholm had proposed.

The hand of Russia's President Vladimir Putin (right) is now strengthened within the OPEC+ cartel controlled by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (left), which today decided to cut production by 2 million barrels.

The confusion around the Biden administration’s petroleum policy was cleared up yesterday after a senior official revealed that the White House had made a secret offer to buy up to 200 million barrels of OPEC+ oil to replenish the SPR in exchange for OPEC+ not cutting oil production. The official said the White House wanted to reassure OPEC+ that the US “won’t leave them hanging dry.” The fact that this offer was made through the White House, not the Department of Energy, may explain why a representative of the Department called Reuters to take back the remarks of Granholm, who has shown herself to be out-of-the-loop, and at a loss for words, relating to key administration decisions relating to oil and gas production.

The revelation poses political risks for Democrats who, in the spring of 2020, killed a proposal by President Donald Trump to replenish the SPR with oil from American producers, not OPEC+ ones, and at a price of $24 a barrel, not the $80 a barrel that the Biden White House promised to OPEC+. At the time, Trump was seeking to stabilize the American oil industry after the Covid-19 pandemic massively reduced oil demand. Trump and Congressional Republicans proposed spending $3 billion to fill the SPR. Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer successfully defeated the proposal, and later bragged that his party had blocked a “bailout for big oil.”

Even normally strong boosters of the Biden White House viewed the Democrats’ opposition to refilling the SPR as a major blunder. “That decision,” noted Bloomberg, “effectively cost the US billions in potential profits and meant Biden had tens of millions of fewer barrels at his disposal with which to counter price surges.” Moreover, observed Bloomberg, it will take significantly more oil today to fill the SPR than it would have two years ago. In spring 2020, the SPR contained 634 million barrels out of a capacity of 727 million. Now, the reserve is below 442 million barrels, its lowest level in 38 years.

The decision looks even worse in light of the decision by OPEC+ today to cut production, which will increase oil prices. The Biden administration in recent days has been pulling out the stops trying to persuade Saudi Arabia and other OPEC+ members, a group that includes Russia, to maintain today’s levels of oil production. Last Friday, the Biden administration sought a 45-day delay in a civil court proceeding over whether Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman should have sovereign immunity for the murder of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi, for which bin Salman has taken responsibility.

The behavior by the Biden White House displays a willingness to sacrifice America’s commitment to human rights for the president’s short-term political needs. Instead of pleading with OPEC+ to maintain or increase high levels of oil production, the Biden administration could have simply allowed for expanded domestic oil production. Instead, Biden has issued fewer leases for on-shore and off-shore oil production than any president since World War II. As such, the pleadings by Biden and administration officials have backfired. The perception of the U.S. in the minds of OPEC+ members has weakened while the influence of Russian President Vladimir Putin has strengthened.

Why is that? Why did the Biden administration decide to spend so much political capital trying, and failing, to get Saudi Arabia and other OPEC+ members to expand production when it could have simply expanded oil production domestically? What, exactly, is going on?

President Joe Biden greets the Saudi Crown Prince on July 15, 2022.

Substack subscribers can click here to read more...

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/06/2022 - 22:20

Read More

Continue Reading

Economics

Are Retail Investors Done? Biggest Liquidation Since 2020 As Retail Is Now ‘Selling The Rally’

Are Retail Investors Done? Biggest Liquidation Since 2020 As Retail Is Now ‘Selling The Rally’

When it comes to the stock purchasing (and…

Published

on

Are Retail Investors Done? Biggest Liquidation Since 2020 As Retail Is Now 'Selling The Rally'

When it comes to the stock purchasing (and selling) habits of institutional and retail investors, even as the former had aggressively unwound their exposure throughout 2022 with both gross and net leverage at multi-year lows, retail investors showed remarkable stoicism, patience and resiliency. But all that changed in recent weeks, and according to JPMorgan's Peng Cheng, retail traders have now capitulated, not only selling stocks for the second week in a row, but in a stark reversal from their momentum-chasing ways, retail investors sold both the Monday and Tuesday rallies.

  • Specifically, in the past week they net sold - $1.1B (1.9-SD  below 12M average), and more notably they sold the rally on both Monday (SPX +2.59%) and Tuesday (+3.06%). Curiously, they remain buyers in ETFs (+$1.4B) and net bought S&P 500 (+0.7z leverage adjusted) but sold Russell 2000 ETFs (- 2.0z).
  • Retail traders net sold -$2.4B of single stocks. Large cap tech names including AAPL (-$470MM), META (-$134MM), and GOOG (-$128MM), in particular, suffered from heavy selling.

As both retail and gross flows and social media posts show, we are well beyond peak retail enthusiasm and we can now conclude that the distribution phase where institutions sell to retail - which defined markets for much of the past two years - is truly over.

Even more notable is that as the chart below shows, the last two weeks represented the worst selling in single stocks since March 2020 (on the other hand, inflows into ETFs, although showing signs of slowdown, remained positive).

Some more details broken down by industry group and thematic:

  • Large-cap: At the industry group level, volumes were slightly higher, driven by Autos and Consumer Services, partially offset by Tech Hardware. Looking at Large-cap single-stock, retail pared down exposure again this past week (-$2.0B) across most industry groups. We again observed some of the strongest retail selling across Technology, especially Tech Hardware (e.g. AAPL, CSCO). This was partially offset by buying within Autos (e.g. TSLA, RIVN, QS).
  • Thematic: Retail investors again shed exposure this past week across themes, though Green / EV Infrastructure (JPAMIGRN) and Long Rising Oil Beneficiaries (JPAMNRGY) were marginal bright spots. We observed heavier selling across Domestic (JPAMDOME) and Covid-19 Domestic Recovery (JPAMCRDB). On the wage side, we also saw Retail cut exposure to US Wage Growth Sensitive Basket (JPAMWAGG)

Bearish sentiment was also evident in the options market. According to JPM, retail traders sold -$1.0B of delta and bought $520MM of gamma this past week. They supplied -$1.3B of delta on SPX/SPY, QQQ, and IWM, mostly via put option buying.

Finally, just to make things "interesting", here is the latest confirmation that anyone trying to make even a little sense of the market is destined for catastrophic failure: as noted above, JPM said that "retail investors sold the rally on both Monday and Tuesday."

Well, one look at VandaTrack's latest weekly research shows that "retail investors have been chasing the last two days rebound by buying US$ 860 mn worth of US securities on Monday and US$ 960 mn on Tuesday. A considerable amount given that they are usually contrarian and reduce their purchases during rallies. We expect this trend to continue and foresee a slowdown in inflows if the rebound will fade; however, we could see a ramp up in purchases if the rally gains traction."

And while retail investors may have bought... or sold... stock in during the latest meltup, depending on whose "research" one reads, one thing is clear: the recent sell-off in retail favorites such as AAPL and TSLA has had a large impact on retail portfolios’ performance and as of yesterday, the average retail portfolio’s relative drawdown is again close to -32% and has started to underperform the S&P 500 again.

As Vanda notes, "additional losses will be both financially and psychologically hard to handle for the average retail trader", and the greater the eventual drawdown, the less likely retail will be to rush into the next dip and buy it.

Tyler Durden Thu, 10/06/2022 - 15:39

Read More

Continue Reading

Bonds

What Is the New York Stock Exchange and What Does It Do?

What Is the New York Stock Exchange in Simple Terms?With more than 2 billion shares trading hands each day, the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is the world’s…

Published

on

The New York Stock Exchange is located on Wall Street in New York City.

wdstock from Getty Images Signature; Canva

What Is the New York Stock Exchange in Simple Terms?

With more than 2 billion shares trading hands each day, the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) is the world’s largest exchange for securities trading, which is the buying and selling of debt or equity, such as stocks and bonds. The NYSE is located in a historic building in the heart of New York City’s financial district at 11 Wall Street.

The NYSE was known for centuries as the "Big Board" because brokers would use an auction-based system to buy or sell shares of stock from its trading floor, and share prices were updated throughout the day on a large board that traders could see from the trading pit. 

A ringing bell signaled the beginning and the end of the trading day. The opening bell signaled the start of the trading day at 9:30 AM, and the closing bell happened at 4:00 PM, marking the end of the trading day. Trades at the NYSE took place on an actual trading floor up until the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic, when everything moved online; floor trading resumed for vaccinated brokers in May 2021.

Is the NYSE a Stock Exchange or a Stock Index?

The NYSE was a privately-owned exchange, or a place for trading, from its inception in the late 1700s until 2006, when it was bought by Intercontinental Exchange, which took shares public. Its ticker symbol is ICE.

However, since the New York Stock Exchange is the world’s largest trading exchange, with over 80% of the S&P 500 companies trading on it, the NYSE Composite, made up of 2,000 stocks listed on the NYSE, has come to be known as a benchmark stock market index. Glancing at how it’s doing gives investors a sense of the overall health of the financial markets. An exchange-traded fund (ETF) based on the NYSE Composite was introduced in 2004; its ticker symbol is NYA.

In addition, the New York Stock Exchange owns a smaller stock exchange, the American Stock Exchange, which it acquired in 2008. Now known as the NYSE American, it is where small-cap companies trade on lower volumes.

What Does the New York Stock Exchange Do? Who Works There? How Does It Make Money?

The NYSE has two purposes:

1. It facilitates buy-and-sell trades of securities.

2. It enables companies to raise capital by selling stock.

The NYSE was originally founded as a space exclusively for securities trading under the Buttonwood agreement in 1792. Prior to that, traders had to sell securities alongside commodities like coffee and tobacco and often had to do so outside, in rain and snow, which is how they got the nickname curbstone brokers.

The Buttonwood Agreement also established regulations and set standard commission fees that brokers could charge clients. Now, with a roof above their heads, traders could call out buy and sell orders from the trading floor; those transactions would be recorded, which provided a level of transparency as well as liquidity that before had not been possible. It was the beginning of efficient market operations as we know them.

Today, computers do most of the buying and selling at the NYSE, although there are still several hundred brokers and traders who shout their orders from the trading pit each day. The scene plays host to dozens of media outlets as well as executives and celebrities who ring the opening bell.

The NYSE makes money through revenues from transaction fees it charges to brokerages, asset-management companies, and market makers. In addition, all members of the NYSE are required to pay yearly membership fees as well as an additional fee to apply.

What Are the New York Stock Exchange’s Hours? Can I visit the NYSE?

The NYSE operates Monday–Friday from 9:30 AM–4:00 PM eastern time. It is closed in observance of the following holidays; when the holiday falls on a Saturday, it closes the Friday before.

  • New Year’s Day
  • Martin Luther King, Jr. Day
  • Washington’s Birthday
  • Good Friday
  • Memorial Day
  • Juneteenth
  • Independence Day
  • Labor Day
  • Thanksgiving Day
  • Christmas Day

The NYSE was open for tours up until the September 11, 2001 attacks; it is no longer accessible to the public.

Which Companies Are Listed in the New York Stock Exchange? How Does a Company Get Listed?

The NYSE lists over 2,000 U.S. and international stocks—for the current lineup, check the directory on its website.

What Is the Difference Between the NYSE and the Nasdaq?

The NYSE and the Nasdaq are both stock exchanges, but the NYSE is much larger. It has a market capitalization of $26 trillion as of 2021, compared with the Nasdaq, which has a market cap of $19 trillion.

In addition, there are several other key differences:

Differences between NYSE and Nasdaq Exchanges

The NYSE sets prices through an auction market, which means that shares are bought directly by buyers from sellers, and share prices are set based on the highest price a bidder is willing to pay and the lowest price a seller will accept.

The Nasdaq uses a dealer market, which means that buyers and sellers do not interact directly; rather, the trades are handled by a dealer, often a larger brokerage known as a market maker, which maintains inventories of stocks and facilitates trades from its own accounts.

Where Is the New York Stock Exchange at Right Now?

For a live feed of NYSE prices, check out its website.

Read More

Continue Reading

Trending