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.     

THE ECONOMIC VALUE OF USING REALIZED VOLATILITY IN FORECASTING FUTURE IMPLIED VOLATILITY

We examine the economic benefits of using realized volatility to forecast future implied volatility for pricing, trading, and hedging in the S&P 500 index options market. We propose an encompassing regression approach to forecast future implied volatility, and hence future option prices, by combining historical realized volatility and current implied volatility. Although the use of realized volatility results in superior performance in the encompassing regressions and out-of-sample option pricing tests, we do not find any significant economic gains in option trading and hedging strategies in the presence of transaction costs.     

A MULTIFACTOR MODEL OF THE QUALITY OPTION IN TREASURY FUTURES CONTRACTS

The values of quality options in Treasury futures contracts are set relative to the prices of all coupon bonds in their respective deliverable sets. As a result, any model used to value the quality option should set its price relative to the set of observed bond prices. This requirement rules out the use of most simple equilibrium models that represent all bond prices in terms of a finite number of state variables. We use the two-factor Heath-Jarrow-Morton model, which permits claims to be priced relative to observable bond prices, to investigate the potential value of the quality option in Treasury bond and note futures. We show that the quality option has significantly more value in a two-factor interest rate economy than in a single-factor economy, and that ignoring it could lead to significant mispricing.     

INFORMATION AND NOISE IN FINANCIAL MARKETS: EVIDENCE FROM THE E‐MINI INDEX FUTURES

I examine the informational contributions and effects on transitory volatility of trades initiated by different types of traders in three actively traded index futures markets. The results show that trades initiated by exchange member firms account for more than 60% of price discovery during the trading day. These institutional trades appear to be more informative than trades of individual exchange members or off‐exchange traders. I also find that off‐exchange traders introduce more noise into the prices than do exchange members. My findings provide new evidence on the role of different types of traders in the price formation process.     

VALUATION OF EVENT‐CONTINGENT OPTIONS

I study a new class of investment options, event‐contingent options. These are options to invest and divest in projects that are dependent on other projects of the same firm or that are conditioned by projects of other firms in its value chain. I construct payoff functions and derive closed‐form solutions for the value of options to invest contingent on investment (OICI), options to invest contingent on divestment (OICD), options to divest contingent on divestment (ODCD), and options to divest contingent on investment (ODCI). I also derive analytical comparative statics for these option valuation equations and examine their implications on the firm's wealth. I offer examples of event‐contingent options in a global context.     

THE PRICING OF FUTURES CONTRACTS AND THE ARBITRAGE PRICING THEORY

When interest rates are stochastic, the cash flows of futures and forward contracts differ because of the marking-to-market requirement of futures contracts. The price effect of this difference is examined here by applying the risk and return model of the arbitrage pricing theory. The resulting futures pricing equation is preference free, and is obtainable using other no-arbitrage approaches. The pricing equation suggests that the price difference is due to the covariance of spot asset returns and interest rates. An empirical study is conducted on the Major Market Index futures from October 1, 1984 to September 27, 1985. Results indicate that the covariance, extracted by the Kalman filter according to the pricing equation, is significant in the pricing of futures contracts.     

CHANGING VOLATILITY AND THE PRICING OF OPTIONS ON STOCK INDEX FUTURES

This paper presents empirical results regarding the suitability of the Black model for the pricing of options on stock index futures. Whaley's technique is used to present empirical evidence regarding the pricing biases of the model. Information provided by the implied volatilities suggests that model refinements should address the changing volatility issue.     

THE IMPORTANCE OF LIQUIDITY AS A FACTOR IN ASSET PRICING

We employ the Fama‐French time‐series regression approach to examine liquidity as a risk factor affecting stock returns. Prior studies establish liquidity as an important consideration in investment decisions. Here, liquidity is found to be an important factor affecting portfolio returns, even after the effects of market, size, book‐to‐market equity, and momentum are considered. Nonzero intercepts remain, however, indicating continued missing risk factors.     

Does futures exhibit maturity effect? New evidence from an extensive set of US and foreign futures contracts

In a seminal article, Samuelson (1965) [Samuelson, P. A. (1965), “Proof that properly anticipated prices fluctuate randomly,” Industrial Management Review 6, 41-49.] proposes the maturity effect that the volatility of futures prices should increase as futures contract approaches maturity. This study provides new evidence on the maturity effect by examining a more extensive set of futures contracts than previous studies and analyzing each contract separately. Using 6805 futures contracts drawn from 61 commodities, including some data from non-US markets, we find that the maturity effect is absent in the majority of contracts. In addition, the maturity effect tends to be stronger in agricultural and energy commodities than in financial futures. We also examine the hypothesis in Bessembinder et al. (1996) [Bessembinder, H., J. F. Coughenour, P. J. Seguin, & M. M. Smoller (1996), “Is there a term structure of futures volatilities? Reevaluating the Samuelson hypothesis,” Journal of Derivatives 4, 45-58.], which states that negative covariance between the spot price and net carry cost causes the maturity effect in futures. Our results provide very weak evidence in favor of this hypothesis.     

The Samuelson hypothesis in futures markets: An analysis using intraday data

This paper considers the Samuelson hypothesis, which argues that the futures price volatility increases as the futures contract approaches its expiration. Utilizing intraday data from 20 futures markets in six futures exchanges, we find strong support for the Samuelson hypothesis in agricultural futures. However, the Samuelson hypothesis does not hold for other futures contracts. We also provide supporting evidence that the ‘negative covariance’ hypothesis is the key factor for the empirical support of the Samuelson hypothesis. In addition, our findings remain largely unaltered even after we control for seasonality and liquidity effects.     

THE ROLE OF INVESTMENT BANK REPUTATION AND RELATIONSHIPS IN EQUITY PRIVATE PLACEMENTS

We explore the role of placement agents in equity private placements. Reputable agents are more likely to place shares of firms that have performed better and that have had frequent prior relationships with the agent. Controlling for self‐selection and endogeneity, firms using reputable agents offer smaller price discounts. However, issuers having frequent prior relationships with placement agents incur higher gross spreads. Although the results support the certification role of investment banks in private placements, they also shed light on the costs incurred by issuers that frequently rely on the same investment bank.     

GLAMOUR VERSUS VALUE: TRADING BEHAVIOR OF INSTITUTIONS AND INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS

We design a new metric to measure the net buying and selling by institutions and individual investors and find that from 1980 to 2004 institutional investors were net buyers of growth stocks and net sellers of value stocks, implying that individual investors were net buyers of value stocks and net sellers of glamour stocks. The institutional preference for glamour and value stocks seems to be related to sell‐side analysts' recommendations and recent favorable stock price performances, especially during the post‐1994 period. Finally, the institutional buying of growth stocks and sale of value stocks was not based on superior information.     

THE CHOICE OF TRADING VENUE AND RELATIVE PRICE IMPACT OF INSTITUTIONAL TRADING: ADRs VERSUS THE UNDERLYING SECURITIES IN THEIR LOCAL MARKETS

We address two important themes associated with institutions’ trading in foreign markets: (1) the choice of trading venues (between a company's listing in its home market and that in the United States as an American Depositary Receipt [ADR]) and (2) the comparison of trading costs across the two venues. We identify institutional trading in both venues using proprietary institutional trading data. Overall, our research underscores the intuition that the choice of institutional trading in a stock's local market or as an ADR is a complex process that embodies variables that measure the relative adverse selection and liquidity at order, stock, and country levels. Institutions route a higher percentage of trades to more liquid markets, and these trades are associated with higher cumulative abnormal returns. We also find that institutional trading costs are generally lower for trading cross‐listed stocks on home exchanges even after controlling for selection bias.