Disagreement is widening inside South Korea’s market over the Korea Exchange plan to extend stock trading hours. The exchange says longer hours would boost global competitiveness and investor convenience, but securities firms and some retail investors question the benefits and warn of confusion. Even if change is needed, a revamp that fails to win market trust is unlikely to succeed.
The exchange had pushed to add a premarket and after-hours session, expanding the trading day from the current 6 hours 30 minutes to about 12 hours. After brokerages raised concerns about the burden of systems development, a lack of testing time and staffing needs, the exchange delayed implementation from late June to Sept. 14. It also adjusted the premarket closing time and decided participation would be voluntary for brokerages.
The schedule change may ease tensions on the surface, but core issues remain. The exchange argues that as overseas markets such as the United States move toward longer trading, South Korea must follow to stay competitive. It says both foreign and domestic investors want more opportunities to trade. In the United States, some markets have active off-exchange trading, and debate continues over 24-hour trading.
Critics say South Korea’s market conditions differ. With liquidity not always sufficient, simply extending hours could spread trading thinner and distort price formation. Thinly traded periods could bring bigger swings, and there are concerns about an increase in spoof orders or short-term speculative trading. Institutions and foreign investors may be able to staff and equip overnight operations, but retail investors could be disadvantaged in access to information and ability to respond.
Brokerages also face added costs. Longer hours would require expanded IT infrastructure, more customer-service staffing and stronger risk-management systems. Large firms may absorb the expense, but smaller and midsize firms could struggle. The cost of a market overhaul could ultimately be passed on to investors through fees or reduced services.
Retail investors are divided as well. Office workers and those seeking trades linked to overseas markets could gain more options. Others warn of fatigue from monitoring prices for longer periods, encouragement of excessive day trading and disruption to daily routines. Longer trading hours, they argue, do not automatically mean greater investor benefit.
The key issue is not speed but sequence. Extending trading hours is not a simple change in business hours; it reshapes market structure. The exchange must first ensure a unified order system, stable technology, safeguards to curb volatility, stronger surveillance against unfair trading and investor-protection measures. Rushing implementation without preparation could leave confusion rather than modernization.
With the exchange now reviewing the plan, it should move away from a one-way push. The article calls for an open verification process involving retail investors, brokerages, academia and financial authorities to assess demand and costs objectively. It also warns against treating the demands of some investors as the needs of the entire market, while cautioning that innovation should not be halted solely because of industry burdens.
The article argues that capital-market competitiveness comes from trust, not trading hours. Markets grow when investors believe trading is fair, systems are stable and prices are formed transparently. Extended hours should come later. If the exchange is acting for the market, it should broaden trust before lengthening the clock.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.