The price of a stock is the purest expression of information asymmetry in markets I’m not a big fan of the initial design of TSVs. For perfectly valid regulatory reasons, they leave participants highly exposed, and I don’t think they can serve as a real-world test of how listed equity markets should work, even if they sidestep the NMS rules. Revisiting those rules will take many years and won’t be easy. Still, the fundamental tension is clear: Risk management versus accessibility I don’t deny that the LPs supplying liquidity to AMM pools can be sophisticated. But an LP in an AMM is, almost by design, candy for arbitrageurs: it can’t reprice its quote when the stock moves elsewhere. On a pure capital-efficiency basis, I don’t believe this is the right model for the future of capital markets. I could be wrong Mutualization among sophisticated traders might create new incentives that make the model viable. If that happens, though, it would effectively mean retail is subsidizing the cost of that lack of sophistication, because a pool charges uninformed flow the same fee as informed flow That said, it doesn’t mean these venues shouldn’t exist. Mutualization can produce environments that are less sensitive to information, more accessible, and more elastic relative to the traditional stock-pricing system.