Why is programmatic trading still in need of "regulated development" when stock borrowing has stopped?

Golden Ten Data reported on July 11 that the A-share market has continued to decline recently, and refinancing and programmatic trading have once again become the focus of controversy. On July 10, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) issued two consecutive policies, announcing the suspension of refinancing securities and strengthening the supervision of high-frequency quantitative trading. The two major policies are interpreted by the market as blockbuster Favourable Information. However, some market participants further pointed out that the refinancing of securities has been stopped, and the exacerbation of the market decline by programmatic trading is also one of the reasons for the market downturn, and programmatic trading should also be suspended or cancelled in the current market environment. In this regard, some industry insiders have analyzed that programmatic trading has the characteristics of “two-sided”, and it is necessary to distinguish the pros and cons of programmatic trading. Since the beginning of this year, some quantitative private sales have suffered significant losses, and some have even lost more than 10%. In response to this “two-sidedness”, the regulatory policy has also chosen to “pursue advantages and avoid disadvantages”. Through targeted regulatory arrangements, the China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) restricts the excessive advantages of high-frequency trading, maintains market order and fairness, and controls negative impacts through targeted regulatory arrangements, and on the other hand, promotes the sustainable and healthy development of the Capital Market by improving the security and stability of the system and regulating high-frequency trading behavior.