ARE PRICE LIMITS EFFECTIVE? EVIDENCE FROM THE ISTANBUL STOCK EXCHANGE

There is considerable discussion about controlling volatility by imposing price limits on asset prices. We examine the effects of price limits on a stock market by testing the volatility spillover, delayed price discovery, and trading interference hypotheses in a leading emerging market, the Istanbul Stock Exchange, which has a unique market microstructure as related to price limits. Our results support the volatility spillover, delayed price discovery, and trading interference hypotheses. We also show price locks at limits provide significantly stronger evidence regarding the effects of price limits than limit moves only. Finally, price limits have a significant effect on the stock market, casting doubt on their effectiveness.     

On the Magnet Effect of Price Limits

The ‘magnet’ or ‘gravitational’ effect hypothesis asserts that, when trading halts are rule‐based, investors concerned with a likely impediment to trade advance trades in time. This behaviour actually pushes prices further towards the limit. Empirical studies about the magnet effect are scarce, most likely because of the unavailability of data on rule‐based halts. In this paper, we use a large database from the Spanish Stock Exchange (SSE), which combines intraday stock specific price limits and short‐lived rule‐based call auctions to stabilise prices, to test this hypothesis. The SSE is particularly well suited to test the magnet effect hypothesis since trading halts are price‐triggered and, therefore, predictable to some extent. Still, the SSE microstructure presents two particularities: (i) a limit‐hit triggers an automatic switch to an alternative trading mechanism, a call auction, rather than a pure halt; (ii) the trading halt only lasts 5 minutes. We find that, even when prices are within a very short distance to the price limits, the probability of observing a limit‐hit is unexpectedly low. Additionally, prices either initiate reversion (non limit‐hit days) or slow down gradually (limit‐hit days) as they come near the intraday limits. Finally, the most aggressive traders progressively become more patient as prices approach the limits. Therefore, both the price patterns and the trading behaviour reported near the limits do not agree with the price limits acting as magnetic fields. Consequently, we conclude that the switching mechanism implemented in the SSE does not induce traders to advance their trading programs in time.     

When machines read the news: Using automated text analytics to quantify high frequency news-implied market reactions

We examine high-frequency market reactions to an intraday stock-specific news flow. Using unique pre-processed data from an automated news analytics tool based on linguistic pattern recognition we exploit information on the indicated relevance, novelty and direction of company-specific news. Employing a high-frequency VAR model based on 20 s data of a cross-section of stocks traded at the London Stock Exchange we find distinct responses in returns, volatility, trading volumes and bid-ask spreads due to news arrivals. We show that a classification of news according to indicated relevance is crucial to filter out noise and to identify significant effects. Moreover, sentiment indicators have predictability for future price trends though the profitability of news-implied trading is deteriorated by increased bid-ask spreads.     

Price Limit Performance: Evidence from the Tokyo Stock Exchange

Price limit advocates claim that price limits decrease stock price volatility, counter overreaction, and do not interfere with trading activity. Conversely, price limit critics claim that price limits cause higher volatility levels on subsequent days (volatility spillover hypothesis), prevent prices from efficiently reaching their equilibrium level (delayed price discovery hypothesis), and interfere with trading due to limitations imposed by price limits (trading interference hypothesis). Empirical research does not provide conclusive support for either positions. We examine the Tokyo Stock Exchange price limit system to test these hypotheses. Our evidence supports all three hypotheses suggesting that price limits may be ineffective.     

Belief-free price formation

We analyze security price formation in a dynamic setting in which long-lived dealers repeatedly compete for the opportunity to trade with short-lived retail traders. We characterize equilibria in which dealers’ pricing strategies are optimal irrespective of the private information that each dealer may possess. Thus, our model’s predictions are robust to different specifications of the dealers’ information structure. These equilibria reconcile, in a unified and parsimonious framework, price dynamics that are reminiscent of well-known stylized facts: excess price volatility, price to trading flow correlation, stochastic volatility and inventory-related trading.     

Price limit performance: New evidence from a quasi-natural experiment in China's ChiNext market

This study examines the impact of daily price limits on market performance and trading activity by using a quasi-natural experiment in China. It focuses on the case of the ChiNext market, where the daily price limits of stocks increased from 10% to 20% in 2020. The results show that, initially, the stock prices and occurrences of 10% price limit hits increase, but then decline after the new price limits have been implemented. The level of trading liquidity and volatility increases significantly, with a greater impact on the short term than the long term. These price limit performances are more pronounced for stocks with additional retail interest. The analysis of detailed trading data reveals that institutional investors initially purchase ChiNext stocks in large quantities, followed by retail investors who purchase smaller quantities. In the long run, institutional investors tend to increase their holdings, while retail investors tend to sell their holdings. Additionally, there is a temporary increase in investor attention, price synchronicity, and stock risks, followed by a decline. The findings suggest that wider price limits increase trading volumes and enhance long-term market efficiency, but encourage immediate price manipulation, causing short-term overreactions and long-term reversals. This study provides valuable insights for building an effective price limit system.     

Do regulatory policies affect the flow of information in emerging markets?

In a previous paper we established that volatility is best explained by contemporaneous rather than lagged trading volume in the Egyptian stock exchange (EGX). The main objective of this paper is to investigate the effects of regulatory policies - namely the switch from price limit to circuit breaker - on the dynamic relationship between trading volume and stock returns volatility in the EGX. Using daily returns data for 20 actively traded companies as well as the EGX30 market index, the Generalised Method of Moments (GMM), results show that the volume-volatility relationship is not only endogenous but is also structurally altered by the switch.     

The effectiveness of competing regulatory regimes and the switching effects: Evidence from an emerging market

I investigate the effectiveness of two competing regulatory regimes and the effect of switching from strict price limits to circuit breakers on volatility spillover, and also on trading interference hypotheses. I find that switching to the circuit breakers' regime increases volatility and disrupts the price discovery mechanism. Stock prices are prevented from reaching their equilibrium levels and traders are unable to obtain their desired positions on limits hit day. Moreover, I find that volatility is spread out over the following 2 days post-limit hits within the strict price limits regime. Finally, the results show that price limits interfere with trading activity and affect investors' beliefs and liquidity positions.     

Price limits in futures markets: effects on the price discovery process and volatility

Price limits are actively employed by many futures exchanges as a regulatory mechanism directed at reducing volatility and improving price discovery process. The aim of this paper is to investigate whether price limits achieve these goals without affecting market liquidity for a number of agricultural futures contracts. We employ models of changing volatility in order to show that price limits do not appear to significantly reduce market volatility. In addition, we find evidence confirming the hypothesis that price limits delay price discovery instead of facilitating it. Our results also suggest that the impact of price limits on volatility and price reversals, found in previous studies, are mainly due to the properties inherent to the futures returns, such as volatility clustering. Finally, although trading decreases significantly due to the price limits, traders do not seem to switch from the contracts affected by price limits to other maturities in order to minimize the impact of circuit breakers.     

Public information arrival: Price discovery and liquidity in electronic limit order markets

How information is translated into market prices is still an open question. This paper studies the impact of newswire messages on intraday price discovery, liquidity, and trading intensity in an electronic limit order market. We take an objective ex ante measure of the tone of a message to study the impacts of positive, negative, and neutral messages on price discovery and trading activity. As expected, we find higher adverse selection costs around the arrival of newswire messages. Negative messages are associated with higher adverse selection costs than positive or neutral messages. Liquidity increases around positive and neutral messages and decreases around negative messages. Available order book depth as well as the trading intensity increases around all news. Our results suggest that market participants possess different information gathering and processing capabilities and that negative news messages are particularly informative and induce stronger market reactions.     

The effect of price limits on intraday volatility and information asymmetry

We investigate the effect of price limits on intra-day volatility and information asymmetry using transactions data from the Taiwan Stock Exchange. Proponents of price limits argue that they provide an opportunity for investors to reevaluate market information and make more rational trading decisions. We identify three different limit hits – closing, single, and consecutive – and hypothesize that only the consecutive limit hits are likely to provide such an opportunity, namely, to counter investor overreaction (volatility hypothesis) and to enhance information revelation (information asymmetry hypothesis). Our empirical evidence supports the volatility hypothesis. Our findings generate important policy implications for stock markets that have price limits.     

SLIPPAGE AND THE CHOICE OF MARKET OR LIMIT ORDERS IN FUTURES TRADING

Retail futures traders face uncertainty regarding the price they will obtain when trading. This price "surprise," known as slippage, can be substantial. Using unique data from an introducing brokerage for Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT) wheat, corn, and soybean futures contracts, we quantify time-to-clear and the magnitude of slippage. We then identify factors that affect these trade quality measures. Finally, we analyze individual trader choice between market and limit orders and find that the likelihood of placing limit orders, where regulations protect traders from slippage, is greater when order and market characteristic indicate that adverse slippage is likely.     

A new paradigm for forecasting security returns in a market regulated by price limits

Numerous futures markets in the US and many stock markets around the world set a “limit” price before each trading session, based on the settlement price at the end of the previous trading day. Price limits are boundaries set by market regulators to restrict large daily fluctuations in the price of securities. Once the return limit is triggered, traders cannot observe the equilibrium return that would have prevailed in the absence of such regulation. We develop an innovative approach for forecasting security returns (and prices) in a market regulated by price limits. Our forecasting model allows for multiple limit-hits. The model is robust, straightforward and easy for practitioners to use. A few numerical predictions are provided for hypothetical securities, and for seven traded futures contracts.     

Aberrant investor participation amid substantial price swings: high-frequency evidence of magnet-repellent effect from Malaysia

Price limits have skirted controversy since inception. Regulators claim limits curb volatility, allay stressed markets, and encourage reflection on information to trade rationally. Opponents contend saying limits delay the inevitable by postponing volatility, deferring equilibrium price discovery, and obtrude investors’ trading plans. While these undesired effects are all ex-post in nature, some argue that limits – by very existence – threaten to invite trading activities towards themselves and govern trade-flow such that the limit’s prophecy is fulfilled. This is known as magnet effect. Theoretical development of this ex-ante effect has been in hibernation since the 1990s. Thus, empirical attempts have been made to test its existence – mostly in East-Asian exchanges with tight limits. Bursa Malaysia, however, defends its ±30% limit for ~30 years based on internal (unpublished) studies. This paper employs a battery of tests to examine the existence and magnitude of magnet effect and – its counterpart – repellent effect in Malaysia. Our findings suggest a weak form of magnet effect and comparable degrees of repellent effect. Moreover, we report price acceleration beyond a threshold point unsupported by order aggression or volume support necessary to constitute a magnet effect. We discuss policy import of our findings and recommend future research avenues worthy of pursuit. Price limits’ opponents argue that limits can threaten to invite trading activities towards themselves such that the limit’s prophecy is fulfilled. Existence of this phenomenon—the magnet effect—has been tested mostly in exchanges with tight limits. This paper employs a battery of tests to examine the existence and magnitude of magnet effect in Bursa Malaysia, which employs a wide price limit. Our findings suggest a weak form of magnet effect and comparable degrees of repellent effect. Moreover, we report price acceleration beyond a threshold point unsupported by order aggression or volume support necessary to constitute magnet effect.     

Why Do Price Limits Exist in Stock Markets? A Manipulation‐Based Explanation

Numerous stock market regulators around the world impose daily price limits on individual stock price movements. We derive a simple model that shows that price limits may deter stock market manipulators. Based on our model's implications, we predict that regulators impose price limit rules for markets where the likelihood of manipulation is high. We present empirical evidence consistent with this hypothesis. Our study is the first to formally propose a manipulation‐based rationale for the existence of price limits in stock markets.     

The magnet effect of price limits: A logit approach

We investigate the magnet effect of price limits using transaction data from the Taiwan Stock Exchange. A logit model incorporates explanatory variables from microstructure literature and reveals that the conditional probability of a price increase (decrease) increases significantly when the price approaches the upper (lower) price limit, in support of the magnet effect. Our approach recognizes when the magnet effect starts to emerge and identifies possible determinants of magnet effect. The probability of information-based trading has a significant impact on the magnet effect for lower price limits.     

Liquidity distribution in the limit order book on the stock exchange of Thailand

The liquidity distribution, or the shape of the limit order book, influences trading behavior and choice of order submission by public liquidity suppliers. The present study seeks to discover whether liquidity providers are concerned about being picked off by informed traders, and whether they are less willing to supply liquidity at the market or demand higher price spreads. The results show that liquidity at the market is a small portion of total liquidity, and that firm size, minimum tick size, volatility, and trading volume play significant roles in determining the liquidity distribution within an order book.     

The effect of a closing call auction on market quality and trading strategies

We study the effects of the introduction of a closing auction (CA) on the microstructure on the continuous trading phase in Borsa Italiana and Paris Bourse. We postulate and compare several empirical predictions based on both standard Kyle-type models and more recent models of limit order book. We find that while the CA has no effect during most of the day, its effect on the last minutes of trading is dramatic. We document a sharp decline in volume, associated with a significant reduction in spread and volatility, and an increase in aggressiveness of liquidity suppliers during the last minutes. We show that the differences in the Reference Price algorithm between Milan and Paris have a significant effect: the CA attracts greater volumes when the Reference Price is equated to the CA price.     

The Effectiveness of Price Limits and Stock Characteristics: Evidence from the Shanghai and Shenzhen Stock Exchanges

We examine the effectiveness of price limits on Chinese A shares and investigate the characteristics of those stocks that hit their price limits more frequently. We find that the effect of price limits is asymmetric for the A shares in upward and downward price movements and different for bullish and bearish sample periods. During a bullish period price limits effectively reduce stock volatility for downward price movements, but not for upward price movements; while during a bearish period price limits effectively reduce stock volatility for upward price movements, but not for downward price movements. Second, price limits delay efficient price discovery for upward price movements, but not for downward price movements. However, we do not find evidence to suggest that price limits harmfully interfere with the stock trading processes in the Chinese A share markets. Finally, we find that actively traded stocks hit their price limits more often and tend to hit the lower limit more frequently when overall market conditions are bearish. Stocks with high book-to-market values of equity hit their upper price limits more frequently, while stocks with a high ratio of tradable shares tend to hit their price limits less frequently.JEL Classification: G10, G14, G15     

The effectiveness of position limits: Evidence from the foreign exchange futures markets

This study considers the effects of the relative size of hedger and speculator open interests and the potential impact of implementing position limits on the price discovery process in both JPY–USD and EUR–USD futures markets. Hedging trading exerts a negative impact, regardless of its size, on price discovery in futures markets. Hedgers are less likely to be information motivated, so their trading uniformly delays the price discovery process. However, there is a positive and nonlinear impact of speculators’ trade size on price discovery, the contribution of which depends on the relative size of the speculative open interest. Contrary to conventional wisdom among regulators, speculative trading does not harm the market in terms of market efficiency; as long as the percentage of speculators’ open interest is below an endogenously determined threshold (approximately 20% for EUR–USD and 16.3% for JPY–USD), speculative trading even improves futures market efficiency.