You're Only A Rogue If You Lose Money

I'm late to the UBS rogue trader story (I was away from the blog yesterday), but the WSJ's Marketbeat blog points out a fact worth repeating: You only hear about "rogue traders" when they lose money.

In fact, the rogues often say they were rewarded for breaking the rules before their trades went bad. From Marketbeat:

Then there is Jerome Kerviel, the ultimate rogue trader who lost $7 billion at Societe Generale in 2008. Kerviel claims he exceeded his credit limits regularly and that when he made money for the bank in 2007, he received a $416,000 bonus for $60 million in profits for SocGen.

Ultimately, the difference between trading floor rogues and royalty is how their bets pay off, not whether they take extreme risks. As [a rogue trader who was busted in the 1990s] said, there's no excuse for not catching rogue trading today or even 18 years ago: "a very simple check would have exposed it."

On a related note, Kid Dynamite writes:

I, as someone with extensive trading experience in varying roles on both sides of the Street, cannot comprehend how a trader can lose billions of dollars without anyone else knowing about it.

The rest of Kid Dynamite's post has lots of technical details about why this is so.

For a broad overview of what just happened at UBS, see this Bloomberg story.



Please keep your community civil. All comments must follow the Community rules and terms of use, and will be moderated prior to posting. NPR reserves the right to use the comments we receive, in whole or in part, and to use the commenter's name and location, in any medium. See also the Terms of Use, Privacy Policy and Community FAQ.

NPR thanks our sponsors

Become an NPR sponsor

Support comes from