30 years ago I was told programmers would no longer be necessary as computer s would generate code. Which has to some extent become reality, but the need for talented programmers (all kind) has never been so high as today.

While I agree that the role of automated trading semi-automatic and/or full-automatic is playing more and more a role, I still do think that there will be a need for technical/creative people to build/test the systems. But the evolution of technology might make it more accessible.

I strongly disagree that the price (for a profitable) signal, EA and ROBO-Advisors will go to zero.

Ron, "will approach zero" - this should not be taken to the decimal, but rather a suggestion of how the future looks. EA´s are already handed out for free by several providers, making their revenue as IB.

And preferable the one's, that do many ping-pong transactions ? (and create many trades...). I am talking about real bot's that create consistent profit, that can not be endless deployed, because if too much contracts are deployed, you don't get filled or you become a target for a stop-run (depends on the instrument). I keep my opinion, the later will not be handed out for free...

Hi Ron, this segment is as you imply a "mixed bag", the article at Finance Magnates was a view into the future, not to comment on the more operational level.

The main line was to focus at the strategic issue, where users are increasingly expected to be self providing their robots and financial trading, rather than purchasing or use ready-made robots developed by some body else. When this evolves, the price of the later will approach zero.

I agree with Ron. Profitable signal providers are not freely available and will always have a (significant) price. If bots are offered for free, there is a reason (and it is not the profitability).

Just imagine a profitable freely available system, ... everyone would use it and it becomes self-destructive.

Hi Marc - I think you missed the point of the article. The outlook is the traders will self-provide their signals in the future. No need to buy signals.

Hi Soren, Every strategy needs an edge and the number of "good" edges is limited (compared to the millions that are claiming to have one). If everyone would be self-providing with a winning bot, who is going to lose the money they are winning ? Well, let's see what future holds in store.

That is a good question Marc - I do not have an answer, expect perhaps not all are good at tennis, and not all will be good at "self-providing". As you said time will tell.

Very interesting thoughts on this. We have to keep in mind an ever changing, regulated industry. Even though broker dealers have "robotic trading" which conceivably reduces the cost in one area, an expanding number of regulations are increasing in another area. For example RegAT is likely to increase the costs and operational risks of running "robotic trading".

While trading may "move offline" the state of the regulations and exchange rules requires that someone be accountable for those trades. Europe is leading the way in making the trader accountable as well as the broker dealer.

Soren - what is the targeted trader - are they discretionary traders who want to have an automated system - and so looking for 'someone ' to program their trade rules - the problem then being 'who' : be they programmers or EAs or whoever - are you saying now that it can be done by the trader without the need for a programmer - they can do it themselves via visual auto trading [there are a few out their, if I may not be mistaken in this space

This is no surprise - on youtube I can learn to create a automated trading program in python and do it in a day...that is beside the point - commodifying a module of automated trading makes that cost towards zero .......in the end it is the program that must make consistent money - and if the active trader whether today or over time can create their own that may be an Uber movement as they keep the magick

Just how sophisticated can visual programming be - is there a limitation or is it work in motion

Some statements in the article are really misinforming and show shallow knowledge of market dynamics and computer science. Markets adjust and switch edges and correlations. Furthermore, an average user that doesn't know how to program will suddenly 'drag and drop' some strategy that makes money while he's drinking beer on the beach. I don't mind.. I'll exploit his ignorance as markets usually do from retail traders.

Igor - with all respect, you are young with limited experience within this topic - you should do your home work before you trow such bold allegations.

Hi Richard - what I say is, the future is moving towards "self-providing". We see it in the first generation of Robo-advisors, where we yest have to see more influence on the advise. We see it across the tech providers in the sector, aiming to provide visual tools, across the trading styles.

As to the trading style of automated trading, of cause a moment arrive where there are visual tools which provide unlimited development - or as mentioned in the article, almost unlimited - but for sure having features which allow for generating profitable results.

How sophisticated can the self-providing tech be ? When the first PC was introduced, I think few would have imagined a Smartphone with a GUI OS.

Morgan Stanley Chase, and others , have Big Data and Robotic trading as strategic areas for 2016 - when such market players put this on top of the strategic agenda, major things can be expected to happen, millions are injected in R&D to make this happen.

Very Interesting....it almost makes me wonder if technology can progress to the point that it will make the financial markets as we know them obsolete and cause them to cease to exist?

Mark - dont think "cease to exist", but definitely change - CME Group is closing the NY Trading Floor at NYMEX end 2016. We are every year increasingly getting digitized and robotized.

I understand...I just wonder what the markets will look like in 100 years. In theory if every investor has perfect access to perfect information would the markets become perfectly efficient? If so could they continue to exist? Interesting conversation for cocktail parties...

Mark, indeed, if everyone has the same tools and perfect information and they use them in a rational way (whatever that may be), markets will cease to exist as everyone will be trying to do the same trade and nobody left to take the opposite side. (but in view of the current market manipulation by central banks and the like, I do not think there will be markets in 20 years from now :-))

Marc, but when all can "self-provide" their financial trading, imply traders will not use the same signal, which will spread the trades.

We all started the journey in trading as 'know nothings' and some of us have progressed to 'know somethings' - progressing from pencil + paper charting to visual auto trading systems and automated trading = me thinks there will still be money in the game in the future even with 'robotics' because the system is made by humans chasing$ and there can be no sustainable equilibrium - people will still work the nano seconds, the intraday, the weeks, and longer term etc as each time zone provides its own ecosystem - and of course most systems fail fast = they may fail faster in the future as there is no perfect information - but then who knows - in the future we are all toast anyway

I suppose as long as humans are involved there will be inefficiencies because were always going to be susceptible to and driven by emotions...and I agree Richard...like Keynes said "In the long run we're all dead"...lol...

Reliable profitability with little drawdown will always cost or even won't be sold.