The information content of trading halts

We investigate the impact of trading halts of NYSE-listed stocks on informationally related securities that continue to trade during the period of the halt. Informational relationships are established for companies in the same four-digit SIC industry based on the correlation of returns, volume, volatility, and the adverse selection components of spreads. We find a significant liquidity impact on informationally related securities with spreads and price impact of trades having substantial increases. However, we also find that quoted depths, the number of trades, and trade volume significantly increase. Our results are consistent with the trading halt model of Spiegel and Subrahmanyam [2000. Asymmetric information and news disclosure rules. Journal of Financial Intermediation 9, 363–403] and with the informed trading model of Tookes [2008. Information, trading, and product market interactions: cross-sectional implications of informed trading. Journal of Finance 63, 379–413]. In addition, our results indicate that there is a common liquidity response of informationally related securities to firm-specific trading halts.     

Bid ask spread in a competitive market with institutions and order size

Large orders, particularly from institutions, are quite common these days and hence there is interest to know if institutional trading has any bearing on the price effect associated with large trades. Recent empirical studies contradict earlier evidence of negative price effect on selling large blocks and find no price effect associated with large trades. Existing theoretical framework suggests a monotonic and increasing adverse price effect for large trades, where the motivation for a large trade is private information. We model a trading system where pure information, information-liquidity, and pure liquidity traders trade small and large sizes. The pure information traders strategically choose an order size. Institutions trade only large sizes because of their low execution costs for large trades; they are information-liquidity traders whose ability to use an information signal to determine their trades is subject to a binding liquidity constraint. We show that in such a market a separating equilibrium where trade size is informative does not exist and hence there is no price effect for large trades. Trade size may be revealing only if there is a buy sell asymmetry (large buy size is not equal to large sell size) or the corresponding price effect is asymmetric (price effect due to a large buy is not equal to that of a large sell). Further for a pooling equilibrium to exist, where trade size is not informative, the width of the market denoted by the ratio of order size (large size/small size) needs to be small, while the shallowness (inverse depth) of the market denoted by the ratio between pure information and institutional trades and the information signal needs to be stronger (higher). Our results on bid and ask prices and spread confirm recent empirical evidence on price effect of large and institutional trades found in the literature.

Limit order books and trade informativeness

In the microstructure literature, information asymmetry is an important determinant of market liquidity. The classic setting is that uninformed dedicated liquidity suppliers charge price concessions when incoming market orders are likely to be informationally motivated. In limit order book (LOB) markets, however, this relationship is less clear, as market participants can switch roles, and freely choose to immediately demand or patiently supply liquidity by submitting either market or limit orders. We study the importance of information asymmetry in LOBs based on a recent sample of 30 German Deutscher Aktienindex (DAX) stocks. We find that Hasbrouck's (1991) measure of trade informativeness Granger causes book liquidity, in particular that required to fill large market orders. Picking-off risk due to public news-induced volatility is more important for top-of-the book liquidity supply. In our multivariate analysis, we control for volatility, trading volume, trading intensity and order imbalance to isolate the effect of trade informativeness on book liquidity.     

Information-Based Trading and Price Improvement

Abstract:  In this study we test the information hypothesis of price improvement. Our results show that price improvement is negatively related to both the probability of information-based trading and the price impact of trades. We interpret these results as evidence that liquidity providers selectively offer price improvements according to the information content of trades. We also show that liquidity providers offer greater (and more frequent) price improvements when they are at the NBBO, and for stocks with wider spreads, fewer trades, or smaller trade sizes relative to the quoted depth. Buyer-initiated trades receive smaller (larger) price improvements than seller-initiated trades on the NYSE (NASDAQ).     

THE DYNAMICS OF QUOTED LIQUIDITY AROUND LARGE TRADES ON THE NYSE

Large trades have potentially disruptive effects on the continuation of subsequent trade. If the large trade executes against volume from limit orders or specialist quotations, continued trade may be unavailable until new liquidity enters the market. Evidence presented in this paper indicates that large trades on the NYSE are followed by decreases in quoted liquidity, which last for an average of fifteen minutes. Both the decreases in quoted liquidity and the time to its subsequent return are related to trade-specific factors. This evidence suggests that not all large trades have the same effect on the continuation of trade.     

Trading and Liquidity on the Tokyo Stock Exchange: A Bird's Eye View

The trading mechanism for equities on the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE) stands in sharp contrast to the primary mechanisms used to trade stocks in the United States. In the United States, exchange-designated specialists have affirmative obligations to provide continuous liquidity to the market. Specialists offer simultaneous and tight quotes to both buy and sell and supply sufficient liquidity to limit the magnitude of price changes between consecutive transactions. In contradistinction, the TSE has no exchange-designated liquidity suppliers. Instead, liquidity is provided through a public limit order book, and liquidity is organized through restrictions on maximum price changes between trades that serve to slow down trading. In this article, we examine the efficacy of the TSE's trading mechanisms at providing liquidity. Our analysis is based on a complete record of transactions and best-bid and best-offer quotes for most stocks in the First Section of the TSE over a period of 26 months. We study the size of the bid-ask spread and its cross-sectional and intertemporal stability; intertemporal patterns in returns, volatility, volume, trade size, and the frequency of trades; and market depth based on the response of quotes to trades and the frequency of trading halts and warning quotes.     

Retail Trading and IPO Returns in the Aftermarket

Using trade size from the Trade and Quote (TAQ) data set as a proxy for individual versus institutional trading, this paper finds that the effects of trading of these two types of investors on initial public offering (IPO) returns on the first trading day depend on the hotness of the IPO. My regression results reveal that IPOs’ open-to-close returns are positively related to small trade participation, small trade purchases, and small trade order imbalance in the hot IPO sample, but not in the cold and neutral IPO samples. In addition, the aftermarket prices of cold and neutral IPOs are primarily driven by the trading of institutional investors, who are less likely to be driven by sentiment.     

The role of trades in price convergence: A study of dual-listed Canadian stocks

We examine the role of trades in restoring price parity for equities trading in multiple markets. Using a sample of stocks trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange and on the NYSE, AMEX or NASDAQ, we contrast price convergence when market makers (a) observe only lagged quotes from both markets and (b) also observe local order flow. Traditional error correction model estimates show that prices in the two markets adjust towards parity in response to quoted price discrepancies, meaning that observation of the cross-market quote helps restore parity. Including order flow in an augmented error correction model, we find that incremental price convergence occurs when trades are routed to the market with the better price, and the importance of quotes in the price convergence process is reduced. Cross-sectional analysis reveals that the importance of order flow in each market is decreasing in firm size and increasing in measures of liquidity. Our findings point to an important, and hitherto unexamined, role for trades in promoting inter-market price convergence.     

Trade size clustering and the cost of trading at the London Stock Exchange

For the London Stock Exchange, this paper investigates differences in trading costs between market maker (off-book) and order book trades, in the context of clustering in trade sizes and prices. We report several substantial findings. Even after controlling for differences in trade size, the realised spread measure is lower for off-book trades. For the order book, trade size clustering is not associated with differences in transaction costs nor with differences in the information content of trades. For the off-book market, trades in clustered (popular) sizes carry significantly more information than non-clustered trades. Despite the significant differences in the price impact estimates between the order book and off-book, we show that traders placing large orders off-book are still better off than trading via the order book as they benefit from a large discount from the current midpoint price. Additionally, we highlight that price and size clustering tend to occur simultaneously rather than being substitutes in this market setting.     

Block Trade Price Asymmetry and Changes in Depth: Evidence from the Australian Stock Exchange

This paper examines the price response to large block transactions on the Australian Stock Exchange during the 1999 sample period. We find asymmetry in the price reaction between buyer‐ and seller‐initiated trades with respect to size and resiliency following the trade. We extend previous research by examining order book changes surrounding block trades and relating price effects to changes in book depth. Purchases are associated with persistent order book imbalance, while the sales imbalance is insignificant. Cross‐sectional analysis demonstrates that price resiliency following a trade is related to the speed at which limit orders arrive to replenish book depth.     

Order dynamics: Recent evidence from the NYSE

We examine investor order choices using evidence from a recent period when the NYSE trades in decimals and allows automatic executions. We analyze the decision to submit or cancel an order or to take no action. For submitted orders, we distinguish order type (market vs. limit), order side (buy vs. sell), execution method (auction vs. automatic), and pricing aggressiveness. We find that the NYSE exhibits positive serial correlation in order type on an order-by-order basis, which suggests that follow-on order strategies dominate adverse selection or liquidity considerations at a moment in time. Aggregated levels of order flow also exhibit positive serial correlation in order type, but appear to be non-stationary processes. Overall, changes in aggregated order flow have an order-type serial correlation that is close to zero at short aggregation intervals, but becomes increasingly negative at longer intervals. This implies a liquidity exhaustion–replenishment cycle. We find that small orders routed to the NYSE's floor auction process are sensitive to the quoted spread, but that small orders routed to the automatic execution system are not. Thus, in addition to foregoing price improvement, traders selecting the speed of automatic executions on the NYSE do so with little regard for the quoted cost of immediacy. As quoted depth increases, traders respond by competing on price via limit orders that undercut existing bid and ask prices. Limit orders are more likely and market sells are less likely late in the trading day. These results are helpful in understanding the order arrival process at the NYSE and have potential applications in academics and industry for optimizing order submission strategies.     

Stealth trading: The case of the Tokyo Stock Exchange

The stealth trading hypothesis asserts that informed traders trade strategically by breaking up their orders so as to more easily hide among the liquidity traders. Using data for the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE), a pure order-driven market, we find evidence that price changes are driven by small- and medium-size trades, with small trades making the greatest contribution to price change relative to their contribution to trading volume. We also find that large trades explain a greater portion of the cumulative price change on high volatility days. Hence, our results support the stealth trading hypothesis for the TSE.     

Do uninformed crossed and internalized trades tap into unexpressed liquidity? The case of Nokia

Crossed and internalized upstairs trades are analysed in a dataset in which institutional investors can be identified. Earlier findings that upstairs trading is uninformed, taps into unexpressed liquidity, and does not affect market quality are revisited. The permanent price effect of crossings and internalized upstairs trades is significantly lower than that of limit order book trades due to the fact that the least informed institutional trades are routed upstairs. Crossed and internalized trades affect the depth and transaction costs in the limit order book and a greater reliance is placed on the upstairs market when liquidity is low and volatility is high.     

Mutual Fund Stock‐Picking Skill: New Evidence from Valuation‐ versus Liquidity‐Motivated Trading

We propose a novel Trade Motivation Matrix that allows differentiating funds’ valuation‐motivated (VM) and liquidity‐motivated (LM) trades on single trade level. It thus enables analyses of stock‐picking skill on three levels: trade, stock, and fund. On trade level, we find significant outperformance of VM buys and significant underperformance of VM sells, indicating manager stock‐picking skills, especially during illiquid market periods. VM trades outperform LM trades, confirming negative performance effects due to flow risk, especially when market liquidity is low. On stock level, collective VM buying explains high future stock returns while collective VM selling is related to future losses, indicating wisdom of the crowd. On fund level, higher trading discretion, measured by a higher degree of VM trading, is observed for smaller, older funds holding higher cash buffers. Finally, higher trading discretion is related to higher future fund alpha, especially during illiquid times.     

TRADE SIZE AND INFORMED TRADING: WHICH TRADES ARE “BIG”?

We find adverse‐selection spread components increase sharply in the ratio of trade size to quoted depth, and spike when trade size equals quoted depth. We find that two previously documented and prominent indicators of informed trading, raw trade size and high‐trading volume half‐hours, offer almost no explanatory power for informed trading measures beyond trade size to quoted depth, and a third indicator, time of day, offers no explanatory power among trades with high trade size to quoted depth. Our results suggest trade size to quoted depth is perhaps the single most important indicator that a trade is informed.     

1-share orders and trades

1-share trades are the most common odd lot trade size, accounting for 9.62% of all odd lot transactions and 3.65% of all trades on NASDAQ in 2012. While 50.41% of 1-share trades result from broken orders, 34.89% of 1-share trades are intentional. We provide substantial evidence that traders use 1-share trades to “ping” for hidden liquidity. In particular, our results indicate that 1-share trades are disproportionately aggressive and also execute against hidden liquidity more than any other odd lot trade size. We also find a relative increase in trading immediately following a 1-share trade. Our results are in line with Clark-Joseph (2014), who suggests that traders may use small, unprofitable trades to detect information from other traders. Specifically, 1-share trades represent the minimum cash outlay necessary to trade, while simultaneously producing the smallest possible effects on a market maker's inventory, and in turn, a security's price.     

Strategic trading and learning about liquidity

Many practitioners point out that the speculative profits of institutional traders are eroded by the difficulty in gauging the price impact of their trades. In this paper, we develop a model of strategic trading where speculators face such a dilemma because of incomplete information about time-varying market liquidity. Unlike the competitive market makers that they trade against, informed traders do not know the distribution of liquidity (“noise”) trades. Instead, they have to learn about liquidity from past prices and trading volume. This learning implies that strategic trades and market statistics such as informational efficiency are path-dependent on past market outcomes. Our paper also has normative implications for practitioners.     

The Behavior of Stock Prices Around Institutional Trades

All trades executed by 37 large investment management firms from July 1986 to December 1988 are used to study the price impact and execution cost of the entire sequence (“package”) of trades that we interpret as an order. We find that market impact and trading cost are related to firm capitalization, relative package size, and, most importantly, to the identity of the management firm behind the trade. Money managers with high demands for immediacy tend to be associated with larger market impact.     

Liquidity commonality and high frequency trading: Evidence from the French stock market

High frequency trading (HFT) depends on sophisticated algorithms to closely monitor price changes across securities. Theory predicts this technological advantage should translate into market-wide liquidity co-variation, by transmitting information-based liquidity shocks. Using a dataset of orders and trades from the French stock market, we investigate whether HFT algorithms constitute a source of systematic liquidity risk. We demonstrate that, across securities, the liquidity offered by high frequency traders is significantly less diverse than that of traditional traders; this finding is in line with the cross-asset learning hypothesis. The excessive co-movement in liquidity is also partly explained by common market making rules. In periods of increased market stress, we find HFT, designated market making, and order size to be important sources of liquidity commonality. Our results have policy implications for market regulators in Paris, suggesting the inclusion of maximum spread-limit rules in market making contracts will reduce the possibility of liquidity drying up when markets are in turmoil.     

Do Proprietary Algorithmic Traders Withdraw Liquidity during Market Stress?

We investigate the role of proprietary algorithmic traders in facilitating liquidity in a limit order market. Using order‐level data from the National Stock Exchange of India, we find that proprietary algorithmic traders increase limit order supply following periods of both high short‐term stock‐specific volatility and extreme stock price movement. Even following periods of high marketwide volatility, they do not decrease their supply of liquidity. We define orders from high‐frequency traders as a subclass of orders from proprietary algorithmic traders that are revised in less than three milliseconds. The behavior of high‐frequency trading mimics the behavior of its parent class. This is inconsistent with the theory that fast traders leave the market when stress situations arise, although their limit‐order‐supplying behavior becomes weaker when the increase in short‐term volatility is more informational than transitory. Agency algorithmic traders and nonalgorithmic traders behave opposite to proprietary algorithmic traders by reducing the supply of liquidity during stress situations. The presence of faster traders in the market possibly instills the fear of adverse selection in them. We document that the order imbalance of agency algorithmic traders is positively related to future short‐term returns, whereas the order imbalance of proprietary algorithmic traders is negatively related to future short‐term returns.