Over on FierceFinanceIT, we've been discussing the notion that Bank of America was a good candidate to become the next gravy-train stock when it comes to high-frequency trading. Given the sinking stock price--down to near penny stock levels--the massive float and the sheer volatility, the stock seems ideal, and many are now ready to pronounce it the next Citigroup.

MarketBeat, which calls the stock "now more of a robot plaything than ever," notes that "from January until late July, an average 158 million Bank of America shares changed hands per day, according to figures from Birinyi Associates Inc. Since the move below $10 per share, that figure has risen to 334 million."

More trading volume has traditionally been considered a good thing. But in this era of low-latency, near-nanosecond trading, some have questioned that viewpoint. This is a complex issue. To be sure, high-frequency trading in many ways is merely a modern way to execute the same old strategies. It's the high-tech method of choice when it comes to market making, various arbitrage strategies and the like. But when a stock like the pre-split Citigroup and now Bank of America emerge, there are some who provide liquidity chiefly to take the rebate that most exchanges now offer via the maker-taker fee model, which now reigns supreme.

For more:
- here's the article

Related articles:
A classic bull vs. bear battle for Bank of America  
Volume drought ends, but good times aren't back  
Bank of America stock swoons, high-frequency traders take note