Create Account
Log In
Dark
chart
exchange
Premium
Terminal
Screener
Stocks
Crypto
Forex
Trends
Depth
Close
Check out our API

CHSH
CHINA SHOE HOLDINGS INC
stock OTC

Inactive
Sep 23, 2021
0.000100USD0.000%(0.000000)200,000
Pre-market
0.00USD-100.000%(0.00)0
After-hours
0.00USD0.000%(0.00)0
OverviewHistoricalExchange VolumeDark Pool LevelsDark Pool PrintsExchangesShort VolumeShort Interest - DailyShort InterestBorrow Fee (CTB)Failure to Deliver (FTD)ShortsTrends
CHSH Reddit Mentions
Subreddits
Limit Labels     

We have sentiment values and mention counts going back to 2017. The complete data set is available via the API.
Take me to the API
CHSH Specific Mentions
As of Aug 4, 2026 7:24:40 AM EDT (<1 min. ago)
Includes all comments and posts. Mentions per user per ticker capped at one per hour.
723 days ago • u/quantum_hft • r/algorithmictrading • how_realistic_is_the_hft_scenario_proposed_in • B
I am a physicist trying to understand [this paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.21723v1) which suggests a use case for quantum entanglement in the context of high-frequency trading. I can assure you the physics in the paper checks out, but I don't really know anything about HFT, so I can't assess if that part of the paper makes any sense or not. So I'm here to ask the bright minds of r/algorithmictrading for help. Here's the rough summary of the paper: It is a known fact that there are certain cooperation games that can be won more often if the players share quantum entanglement between them. One of these games is called the [CHSH game](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHSH_inequality#CHSH_game). The authors of this paper claim that a plausible high-frequency trading scenario is actually analogous to the CHSH game, and hence traders in this scenario could benefit from sharing quantum entanglement between them. The scenario is described in section 3 and a bit in section 4 of the paper. Check it out.
* So, is what they describe at all a realistic HFT situation? Even a little bit?
* The paper claims that this scenario rises again and again, on the order of hundreds of thousands of times per second. Is that a reasonable estimate?
* The premise of the scenario is that two trading algorithms on two different exchanges need to be precisely coordinated. Specifically that they need to be coordinated to a precision smaller than the latency between the two exchanges (e.g. the 188 microseconds it takes for light to travel between NYSE and Nasdaq). Is coordination at that level of precision even meaningful? I mean, presumably the two exchanges provide different environments for the algorithms and those two environments aren't themselves coordinated at such small timescales, right? Like I said, I really don't know anything about this stuff.
Anyway, if anyone has any insight into this, or even has a direction to point me in, I'd be eternally grateful.
sentiment 0.99
723 days ago • u/quantum_hft • r/algorithmictrading • how_realistic_is_the_hft_scenario_proposed_in • B
I am a physicist trying to understand [this paper](https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.21723v1) which suggests a use case for quantum entanglement in the context of high-frequency trading. I can assure you the physics in the paper checks out, but I don't really know anything about HFT, so I can't assess if that part of the paper makes any sense or not. So I'm here to ask the bright minds of r/algorithmictrading for help. Here's the rough summary of the paper: It is a known fact that there are certain cooperation games that can be won more often if the players share quantum entanglement between them. One of these games is called the [CHSH game](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHSH_inequality#CHSH_game). The authors of this paper claim that a plausible high-frequency trading scenario is actually analogous to the CHSH game, and hence traders in this scenario could benefit from sharing quantum entanglement between them. The scenario is described in section 3 and a bit in section 4 of the paper. Check it out.
* So, is what they describe at all a realistic HFT situation? Even a little bit?
* The paper claims that this scenario rises again and again, on the order of hundreds of thousands of times per second. Is that a reasonable estimate?
* The premise of the scenario is that two trading algorithms on two different exchanges need to be precisely coordinated. Specifically that they need to be coordinated to a precision smaller than the latency between the two exchanges (e.g. the 188 microseconds it takes for light to travel between NYSE and Nasdaq). Is coordination at that level of precision even meaningful? I mean, presumably the two exchanges provide different environments for the algorithms and those two environments aren't themselves coordinated at such small timescales, right? Like I said, I really don't know anything about this stuff.
Anyway, if anyone has any insight into this, or even has a direction to point me in, I'd be eternally grateful.
sentiment 0.99


Share
About
Pricing
Policies
Markets
API
Info
tz UTC-4
Connect with us
ChartExchange Email
ChartExchange on Discord
ChartExchange on X
ChartExchange on Reddit
ChartExchange on GitHub
ChartExchange on YouTube
© 2020 - 2026 ChartExchange LLC