Market Response to Liquidity Improvements: Evidence from Exchange Listings

The study examines a sample of 895 stocks that moved from Nasdaq to the New York Stock Exchange or to the American Stock Exchange (Amex) between 1971 and 1994. We show how various measures of liquidity such as the bid‐ask spread, trading volume, and stock price precision improve in somewhat different ways upon transfer to NYSE (Amex). We also find that reductions in trading costs (percentage spread) and in pricing error volatility (Hasbrouck's σ₅) can explain most of stock market's positive response to exchange listing. Thus, liquidity has many facets and cannot be represented by the bid‐ask spread alone.     

RECENT GROWTH IN NASDAQ TRADING VOLUME AND ITS RELATION TO MARKET VOLATILITY

We document a significant increase in Nasdaq trading volume relative to New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and American Stock Exchange (AMEX) trading volumes. Although recent increases in the number of shares traded are reported in the financial press, we also find it present in the percentage of dollar values traded. We then examine correlations between trading volume and several measures of market volatility. Nasdaq volume appears to be more closely correlated with residual variance, while NYSE and AMEX volumes are more closely correlated with overall market variance. We conclude that the type and quantity of information driving trading are different on Nasdaq than on the two exchanges, and that the relative growth in Nasdaq volume cannot be attributed solely to differences in the methods of counting volume in the two market environments.     

The Nasdaq-Amex Merger, Nasdaq Reforms, and the Liquidity of Small Firms

After the Nasdaq and American Stock Exchange (AMEX) merged in 1998, officials of the new entity argued that some “smaller, harder to trade” companies on Nasdaq should switch to AMEX to improve liquidity. This recommendation is based on the traditional view among academics and practitioners alike that a substantial trading cost reduction should be realized when a company switches from the multidealer Nasdaq system to the AMEX specialist system. However, in light of the 1997 Nasdaq reforms, we reexamine the validity of these arguments using data from 1996–98 on firms that switch from the Nasdaq to the AMEX or the New York Stock Exchange. Evidence from transaction costs, volatility, and stock returns shows declining benefits to switching during the sample period. Our findings indicate that the liquidity improvement from exchange listing is limited in the wake of the Nasdaq reforms of 1997.     

Transactions Costs and Holding Periods for Common Stocks

Amihud and Mendelson (1986) and Constantinides (1986) provide a theoretical basis for the proposition that assets with higher transactions costs are held by investors for longer holding periods, and vice versa. We examine average holding periods and bid-ask spreads for Nasdaq stocks from 1983 through 1991 and for New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) stocks from 1975 through 1989 and find strong evidence that, as predicted, the length of investors' holding periods is related to bid-ask spreads. We also find that the relation between holding periods and bid-ask spreads is much stronger on Nasdaq, where spreads are larger, than on the NYSE, where spreads are smaller.     

Institutional Equity Trading Costs: NYSE Versus Nasdaq

We compare execution costs (market impact plus commission) on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and Nasdaq for institutional investors. The differences in cost generally conform to each market's area of specialization. Controlling for firm size, trade size, and the money management firm's identity, costs are lower on Nasdaq for trades in comparatively smaller firms, while costs for trading the larger stocks are lower on NYSE. The cost differences estimated from a regression model are, however, sensitive to the choice of time period.     

THE CROSS-AUTOCORRELATION OF SIZE-BASED PORTFOLIO RETURNS IS NOT AN ARTIFACT OF PORTFOLIO AUTOCORRELATION

Prior studies find evidence of asymmetric size-based portfolio return cross-autocorrelations where lagged large firm returns lead current small firm returns. However, some studies question whether this economic relation is independent of the effect of portfolio return autocorrelation. We formally test for this independence using size-based portfolios of New York Stock Exchange and American Stock Exchange securities and, separately, portfolios of Nasdaq securities. Results from causality regressions indicate that, across all markets, lagged large firm returns predict current small firm returns, even after controlling for autocorrelation in small firm returns. These cross-autocorrelation patterns are stronger for Nasdaq securities.     

The competitive effects of US decimalization: Evidence from the US-listed Canadian stocks

This paper analyzes the impact of US decimalization on the Canadian stocks listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange (TSE) and either the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) or National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotation System (Nasdaq) in the US. Using a sample of 126 firms, we find that the US trading of these stocks increases after decimalization, but this increase is not at the expense of TSE volume. Indeed, the TSE volume increases substantially for those securities that are traded on Nasdaq and increases marginally for those securities that are traded on the NYSE. Most of the increase in volume is in retail-sized trades. The bid–ask spreads and the quote depths decline on all exchanges, but by a greater amount in the US than in Canada. The depths on the NYSE decline from being above the TSE depths to well below the TSE depths. We also find that the decline in the TSE spread is directly related to the size of the firm and to the decline in the US spread, and is inversely related to the pre-decimalization ratio of spreads on the US exchange and the TSE. Overall, our results indicate that the US decimalization had the desired positive impact on trading in both the US and Canada, with a decrease in spreads and an increase in retail-sized trading.     

Nasdaq and The Chicago Stock Exchange: An Analysis of Multiple Market Trading

We analyze a set of 97 NASD-listed securities that trade on both the Nasdaq and Chicago Stock Exchange (CHX) to determine if trading costs and price improvement differ between the two markets. We find that order execution costs, which we define by the traded spread and the signed effective half-spread, are significantly lower on the CHX. This difference is consistent over trade types and for trades of at least 1,000 shares. Also, we find that trades occurring on the CHX receive more price improvement than do those occurring on Nasdaq.     

Trading Mechanisms and the Components of the Bid-Ask Spread

We compare the relative magnitudes of the components of the bid-ask spread for New York Stock Exchange (NYSE)/American Stock Exchange (AMEX) stocks to those of National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations (NASDAQ)/National Market System (NMS) stocks. We find that the order-processing cost component is smaller, and the adverse selection component is greater on the NYSE/AMEX trading systems than on the NASDAQ/NMS system. The inventory holding component is also greater for exchange-traded stocks than for NASDAQ/NMS stocks, but this may be attributable to differences in the characteristics of the firms whose stocks trade on the respective systems.     

AN EVALUATION OF THE PERFORMANCE OF PORTFOLIOS SELECTED FROM VALUE LINE RANK ONE STOCKS: 1976–1982

In this study, the performance of portfolios selected from among Value Line rank one stocks is compared with portfolios consisting of randomly selected New York Stock Exchange and American Stock Exchange stocks. Results indicate that before considering transactions costs, active traders who invest in Value Line rank one stocks can earn positive excess returns. However, after considering transaction costs, neither active traders nor passive investors in rank one stocks can earn returns that are statistically greater than returns achieved by portfolios of randomly selected stocks. These results are not sensitive to variations in portfolio size.     

Liquidity and Stock Exchange Listing

This study examines the pattern of stock price behavior for a sample of 71 firms that moved from NASDAQ and NASDAQ/NMS to the American Stock Exchange (AMEX) between 1982 and 1987. The study tests the liquidity gains hypothesis, which states that investors expect liquidity gains for the less liquid over-the-counter stocks but not for their more liquid counterparts after their listing on the AMEX. The results support the hypothesis by showing a significant difference between the two groups of stocks on the day the AMEX announced approval of the listing. Thus, companies with low liquidity are the largest beneficiaries of listing. The evidence provides little support for the anomalous negative pattern of returns during the post-listing period reported in previous studies.     

The Operating Performance of Firms that Switch Their Stock Listings

In this article we examine the operating performance of stocks that switch from NASDAQ to the American Stock Exchange (AMEX) or the New Stock Exchange (NYSE) and from AMEX to the NYSE. Specifically, we investigate whether post‐listing operating performance is consistent with the reported negative long‐term drift of post‐listing stock returns and whether there is evidence of self‐selection of the listing time. We find evidence of negative post‐listing changes in operating return on assets and sales, which, on a match‐adjusted basis, are significant for the relatively small NASDAQ stocks switching to AMEX. We also find evidence that firms self‐select the time of listing changes.     

EVIDENCE OF MANAGERIAL TIMING: THE CASE OF EXCHANGE LISTINGS

Before an exchange listing, stock performance is exceptionally high. Earlier research reports that post-listing performance is poor. I document that the post-listing performance of most firms that list on either the American Stock Exchange or the New York Stock Exchange differs little from that of similar stocks that do not list. However, listing stocks that experience the highest pre-listing performance underperform their control stocks after listing. This finding supports the hypothesis that managers can time exchange listings around a peak in stock performance.     

Cost of Transacting and Expected Returns in the Nasdaq Market

This article empirically examines the liquidity premium predicted by the Amihud and Mendelson (1986) model using Nasdaq data over the 1973–1990 period. The results support the model and are much stronger than for the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), as reported by Chen and Kan (1989) and Eleswarapu and Reinganum (1993) . I conjecture that the stronger evidence on the Nasdaq is due to the dealers' inside spreads on the Nasdaq being a better proxy for the actual cost of transacting than the quoted spreads on the NYSE, since the Nasdaq dealers do not face competition from limit orders or floor traders.     

The immediate price impact of trades on the Australian Stock Exchange

We study the immediate price impact of a single trade executed in the Australian Stock Exchange (ASX). By ordering the top 300 stocks on the ASX in order of their free float market capitalization, a clear pattern emerges, with higher cap stocks experiencing lower price impact than lower cap stocks for the same traded volume. We investigate this relationship in detail, and show that the price impact and liquidity scale as a power of the market capitalization. This relationship is used to obtain a single market impact curve which shows average price shift as a function of volume traded. We obtain similar results for every year from 2001 to 2004.     

Spreads, Depths, and Quote Clustering on the NYSE and Nasdaq: Evidence after the 1997 Securities and Exchange Commission Rule Changes

This paper examines liquidity and quote clustering on the NYSE and Nasdaq using data after the two market reforms—the 1997 order–handling rule and minimum tick size changes. We find that Nasdaq–listed stocks exhibit wider spreads and smaller depths than NYSE–listed stocks and stocks with higher proportions of even–eighth and even–sixteenth quotes have wider quoted, effective, and realized spreads on both the NYSE and Nasdaq. This result differs from the findings by Bessembinder (1999, p. 404) that "trade execution costs on Nasdaq in late 1997 are no longer significantly explained by a tendency for liquidity providers to avoid odd–eighth quotations," and "odd–sixteenth avoidance has little relevance for explaining post–reform Nasdaq trading costs."     

IPO Listings: Where and Why?

According to most research, firms benefit from being listed on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). Nevertheless, 224 of 640 firms that went public from 1993 through 2000 and were eligible for a NYSE listing chose to list their stock on Nasdaq. We hypothesize that this choice may be related to Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Rule 144. The rule regulates the sale of restricted stock by limiting the amount of unregistered stock that can be sold by an individual. We investigate the determinants of post-IPO sales of restricted stock, examine IPO firms' listing choices, and find evidence consistent with firms selecting Nasdaq to reduce the effect of the limits on selling restricted stock imposed by the SEC's Rule 144. Venture capitalists play an important role in this listing decision.     

Reputation Effects in Trading on the New York Stock Exchange

Theory suggests that reputations allow nonanonymous markets to attenuate adverse selection in trading. We identify instances in which New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) stocks experience trading floor relocations. Although specialists follow the stocks to their new locations, most brokers do not. We find a discernable increase in liquidity costs around a stock's relocation that is larger for stocks with higher adverse selection and greater broker turnover. We also find that floor brokers relocating with the stock obtain lower trading costs than brokers not moving and brokers beginning trading post‐move. Our results suggest that reputation plays an important role in the NYSE's liquidity provision process.     

Market changes and spread components,implications for international markets

Trading in international markets is changing and evolving due to competitive pressure and technological innovations. Evidence of changes are seen on the London Stock Exchange, Amsterdam Stock Exchange, the Swiss Exchange, and the Deutsche Borse. This paper examines changes in the components of Nasdaq spreads following the implementation of new Order Handling Rules in early 1997 and the reduction in minimum tick size from $0.125 to $0.0625 in June 1997. Trading volume increases and spreads decrease significantly following each change. We find that order processing and asymmetric information costs decline following each rule change. Inventory holding costs increase over the sample period. Also, we find a significant increase in the probability of a trade flow reversal after the implementation of the Order Handling Rules.     

The market-adjusted investment performance of ADR IPOs and SEOs

Initial public and seasoned equity offerings of American depositary receipts (ADRs) yield significantly positive market-adjusted returns both in early trading and over the longer run. This is in sharp contrast with the long-term performance of initial public offerings and seasoned equity offerings of common stocks in general. In addition, ADRs from emerging markets outperform those originating from developed countries, and those listed on the New York Stock Exchange generate higher after-market returns than those trading on the American Stock Exchange or the National Association of Security Dealers Automated Quotation System.