London Stock Exchange Investors - LSE

London Stock Exchange Investors - LSE

Best deals to access real time data!
Monthly Subscription
for only
Level 2 Basic
Monthly Subscription
for only
UK/US Silver
Monthly Subscription
for only
VAT not included
Stock Name Stock Symbol Market Stock Type Stock ISIN Stock Description
London Stock Exchange Group Plc LSE London Ordinary Share GB00B0SWJX34 ORD SHS 6 79/86P
  Price Change Price Change % Stock Price Last Trade
0.00 0.0% 8,620.00 01:00:00
Open Price Low Price High Price Close Price Previous Close
8,620.00 8,620.00
more quote information »

Top Investor Posts

apollocreed1: @Luderitz- There's a trade in the markets at the moment being called a "rotation" where the belief that monetary easing by central banks this month will create economic growth is directing traders to sell high quality, proxy-bond stocks like LSE and "rotate" into cheaper "value" stocks that may do better if growth improves. LSE has fallen simultaneously with Unilever, Diageo, Paypal, Microsoft, Facebook and virtually every stock that you will see in the portfolios of Lindsell Train and Fundsmith has had a massive fall over the last 2-3 trading days. Those 2 funds hold high-quality proxy-bond stocks and they have suddenly gone out of favour. So the indices are slightly up, but they are being led up by the rally in banking stocks and similar stocks that were considered rubbish until last week. See Jim Cramer talking about rotation at this link today: And these articles:
dins1249: Market cap is £9bn. Financing in place for £10bn. LSE is a prized asset and NYSE will not let is get away. Almost 10% upside possible implying counter bid at nearly £31. I think investors have not woken upto this.
jsbach123: Miss Caroline Twinset-Andpearls speaking on behalf of an IT company said 'it was jolly unfair for investors to be angry about a technical failure "that could have happened to anybody."'
abcd1234: they fell for this Sri Lankan company, then blew millions taking them over and forcing this system software change down everybodies throats. They have said from the start there were no problems. yeah right. Screw the small investors. As a p.i., I have had to accept two weeks of missing data, rogue level2 stuff, and the loss of historical datestamping on Level 2 (permanently !!).... all for the arrogant LSE. The p.i.'s come last. Nothing ever changes.
leedskier: John is that for technical reasons? It can be quite important for private investors to know pre market whether good news or bad, is going impact significantly on the opening price of AIM shares. Will L2 show the pre market 'adjustment' by the MM? add: In the first two or three minutes of trading an AIM share can move 10-20%, these moves are often preceded by big changes by the MM pre market. Without advance notice there is little or no time to prepare for these moves.
gengulphus: What ADVFN trade flags try to show you is whether the buyer or the seller is the "aggressor" in the trade. If I place a sell order on SETS and wait for it to be filled then I am the passive participant. The person who comes along and picks off my order is the active participant and ADVFN will probably flag it as a buy, as long as they base their flagging on the yellow strip prior to the order being picked off. Agreed that that's a sensible definition of "buys" and "sells". But I don't think the ADVFN trade flags do a good job of trying to follow that definition. For example, auction uncrossing trades get classified as "buys" or "sells" according to the price paid - but the only really sensible way I can see to apply the passive/active participant distinction would be to regard those participants who use limit orders as "passive" (they're willing to trade, but only at the right price) and those who use market orders as "active" (they want to trade if possible). Or when a market maker hears that investor X is willing to buy a large number of shares at up to a certain price and investor Y is willing to sell a large number of trades at down to a certain price and is able to negotiate a trade between them, both buyer and seller have adopted a "passive" role, so you cannot really classify the trade as either a "buy" or a "sell" under that definition. Yet another example is the pairs of trades at identical or near-identical prices that result from spreadbet rollovers - they're basically a case in which the buyer and seller are the same person and are adopting the same sort of role. And there are plenty of other examples... I'm not saying that it's in ADVFN's power to do a better job on all such cases - there are some cases where they can (for example, IMHO all "UT" trades would be better classified as "?"s) but in many cases they simply don't get the data to base a sensible judgement on. And even in the cases where they can, it is often only a better judgement, not an ideal one (e.g. I regard classifying a "UT" trade as a "?" as better than classifying it as a "buy" or "sell" according to the price, but ideally it would be split up into "buys" for buy market orders matched to sell limit orders, "sells" for sell market orders matched to buy limit orders, and "?"s for the other two cases). Improving the "buy" vs "sell" distinction would I think in many cases require more information to be reported on the trades, not just better interpretation of the data that is reported - something the exchanges can potentially do, not something ADVFN can. And I rather suspect that classifying trades as "buys", "sells" and "?"s according to that definition would result in most large trades being reported as "?"s, and as a result, a large proportion of the volume of shares traded being reported as "?"s. Would the people who use "buys" vs "sells" information really like the result? They're used to seeing things like 40% "buys", 55% "sells" and 5% "?"s, where the "sells" are apparently in a clear majority - would they like routinely seeing things like 20% "buys", 25% "sells", 55% "?"s, or would they regard it as too wishy-washy to be useful? If the former, then effort put into improving the system to follow the "active" vs "passive" participant distinction better might be worthwhile; if the latter, there's no point and you might as well face the fact that the current system does not do a good job of following that distinction... Gengulphus
wdurham: So what is a buy or a sell? AT trades are a matched buy and sell for which only one trade report is required. O trades are also matched buys and sells for which only one trade report is required: investor sells to MM, and MM buys from investor. Buys and sells, frankly, are a nonsense, because every trade is both buy and sell. The PRICE is the guide to what's going on in the stock, not whether there are more buys than sells or vice versa.
tadtech: My guess is that this will not be resolved this week! In the meantime we cannot use charts properly or gauge sentiment on stocks via 'true' price movements. I suspect many private investors are not trading at all currently.
10:04 ..LSE boss Xavier Rolet will have heaved a huge sigh of relief that the Millennium IT platform appears to have been implemented without any major hitches. The launch was originally set for November, but embarrassingly the system crashed, causing the exchange to investigate whether it had been the target of sabotage. It later admitted that 'human error' was responsible. The start of the new Millennium Exchange trading system provides a psychological boost to the LSE, as it seeks to convince investors that it is doing the right thing by sewing up a £4.3bn all share 'merger of equals' with Canada's TMX.
tadtech: I would suspect that a large number of private investors are not trading currently due to price consistency issues, this combined with a large spread bet company ceasing trading in AIM stocks on Friday has created a perfect storm for the market makers to drop prices.
ADVFN Advertorial
Your Recent History
London Sto..
Register now to watch these stocks streaming on the ADVFN Monitor.

Monitor lets you view up to 110 of your favourite stocks at once and is completely free to use.

By accessing the services available at ADVFN you are agreeing to be bound by ADVFN's Terms & Conditions

P: V: D:20210417 15:56:06