UNLISTED TRADING PRIVILEGES,LIQUIDITY, AND STOCK RETURNS

In this study we examine the effect of dual trading through unlisted trading privileges (UTPs) on liquidity and stock returns. Stocks with UTPs trade in a different market structure than stocks listed and traded only on the AMEX and NYSE. Differences in market structure may affect stock returns through liquidity services provided by the competing markets. The sample comprises 852 AMEX and NYSE firms that began unlisted trading on the Philadelphia, Pacific, Midwest, or Cincinnati exchanges between 1984 and 1988. The results show significantly positive abnormal returns around the SEC's announcement of a regional exchange's filing for UTPs. The results also suggest that increased competition improves trading liquidity. Only stocks with low liquidity before UTPs announcements experience significantly improved liquidity and positive stock returns.     

Do aggressive orders affect liquidity? An evidence from an emerging market

This paper investigates how aggressive orders affect spreads and trading activity measures on the stock market. Based on a sample of stocks listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange this study finds that spreads and trading activity measures increase significantly when aggressive orders are executed, but quickly revert to initial levels. The reaction to these orders on the bid and ask side of the market is similar. The effect of aggressive orders differ depending on the size of the firms. Trading activity measures such as volumes or number of transactions increase stronger for bigger than for smaller stocks, while spreads increase more for smaller firms than for bigger ones. These findings enrich the understanding of liquidity dynamics especially on the emerging markets where liquidity is an important price formation factor.     

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.     

Equity trading by institutional investors: Evidence on order submission strategies

The trading volume channeled through off-market crossing networks is growing. Passive matching of orders outside the primary market lowers several components of execution costs compared to regular trading. On the other hand, the risk of non-execution imposes opportunity costs, and the inherent “free riding” on the price discovery process raises concerns that this eventually will lead to lower liquidity in the primary market. Using a detailed data set from a large investor in the US equity markets, we find evidence that competition from crossing networks is concentrated in the most liquid stocks in a sample of the largest companies in the US. Simulations of alternative trading strategies indicate that the investor’s strategy of initially trying to cross all stocks was cost effective: in spite of their high liquidity, the crossed stocks would have been unlikely to achieve at lower execution costs in the open market.     

Liquidity Changes around Seasoned Equity Issuance: Public Offerings versus Private Placements

I investigate whether firms that issue equity, in public offerings or private placements, have improved on liquidity in the secondary market. Transaction costs, price impacts, and trading activity are examined. Results show that public offering stocks become considerably more liquid in all three dimensions. For private placement stocks, there is some evidence that trading volume increases, but effective spread and temporary price impact decline less than market‐wide changes. Furthermore, I study the behaviors of participants in the newly issued equity market. Analyses indicate that underwriters, analysts, and market makers all contribute to liquidity changes, but in different aspects.     

Internationalization and Stock Market Liquidity*

What is the impact of internationalization (firms raising capital and trading in international markets) on the liquidity of the remaining firms in domestic markets? To address this question, we assemble a panel database of nearly 2,900 firms from 45 emerging economies over the period 1989–2000, constructed from annual and daily data. First, we find evidence of migration. The domestic trading of firms that cross-list or issue depositary receipts in foreign public exchanges tends to decrease, while a significant proportion of their trading activity concentrates in international markets. Second, this migration is negatively related to the liquidity of the remaining firms in their home market through two separate channels. There are liquidity spillovers within markets: Aggregate domestic trading activity is positively associated with the liquidity of individual firms in the same market. Moreover, the proportion of trading abroad is negatively related to the liquidity of firms in the domestic market. * The paper was revised while Schmukler was visiting the IMF Research Department. We thank Tatiana Didier and Juan Carlos Gozzi Valdez for truly outstanding research assistance. We are grateful to Franklin Allen and Marco Pagano for very useful and detailed comments. We also received very helpful suggestions from Gordon Alexander, Luca Benzoni, Stijn Claessens, Peter Henry, Eduardo Loyo, Ugo Panizza, Valery Polknichenko, Helene Rey, Michael Schill, Frank Warnock, two anonymous referees, seminar participants at Dartmouth College, the Econometric Society Meetings (Chile), the NBER IASE Meeting in PUC-Rio (Brazil), the University of Minnesota, the University of Virginia (Darden School of Business), the University of Zurich, and the World Bank. For help with the data, we thank particularly Florencia Moizeszowicz and also Pamela Dottin, Monica Erpen, Dori Flanagan, Marina Halac, Angela Marshall, Konstantinos Tzioumis, Richard Webster-Smith, and Cheryl Workman. Levine is grateful for generous financial support from the BSI Gamma Foundation. Schmukler thanks the World Bank Latin American Regional Studies Program and Research Support Budget for ample financial support. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the World Bank.     

Liquidity in auction and specialist market structures: Evidence from the Italian bourse

Several studies find that bid-ask spreads for stocks listed on the NYSE are lower than for stocks listed on NASDAQ. While this suggests that specialist market structures provide greater liquidity than competing dealer markets, the nature of trading on the NYSE, which comprises a specialist competing with limit order flow, obfuscates the comparison. In 2001, a structural change was implemented on the Italian Bourse. Many stocks that traded in an auction market switched to a specialist market, where the specialist controls order flow. Results confirm that liquidity is significantly improved when stocks commence trading in the specialist market. Analysis of the components of the bid-ask spread reveal that the adverse selection component of the spread is significantly reduced. This evidence suggests that specialist market structures provide greater liquidity to market participants.     

Does stock market development always improve firm-level financing? Evidence from Tunisia

The question of whether or not increased stock market size allows for improved financing conditions for firms in emerging markets is an important one for policy-making. This paper seeks to investigate this issue by analyzing whether increases in market-level liquidity have indeed trickled down to individual firms over the last decade of stock market development in Tunisia, a fast-growing Mediterranean emerging market. We develop time varying liquidity scores for all firms listed in the Tunisian market over the 1997–2009 period and analyze the extent to which market development, firm-level characteristics and risk exposure affect the magnitude and the distribution of liquidity using a set of fixed effect panel regressions. Our results suggest that massive increases in value traded have created market congestion, thereby increasing the costs of trading, in a context of persistently low efficiency and increased international integration. The main implications of this process are (i) market-level development and international integration are not sufficient conditions to ease access to finance for local firms, (ii) further reforms in the Tunisian market should focus on diversifying corporate ownership and improving the disclosure of information, and (iii) international investors seeking diversification in Tunisia should be aware of a significant illiquidity risk.     

Cross-listing and subsequent delisting in foreign markets

Employing a sample of stocks cross-listed and subsequently delisted from foreign markets, we examine the consequences of delisting to investors in terms of price, risk, and liquidity. We also provide a direct comparison between the firm's performance after a foreign cross-listing and after its subsequent delisting. We find a positive cross-listing and negative delisting effect on stock price, both of which dissipate in the long run. No significant changes in the market risk are found for either event. Foreign cross-listing and delisting are associated with increasing and decreasing long term trading volume respectively. Further analysis reveals that firms delist in response to low host market return and low firm trading volume in the host market. The changes in liquidity and market risk from delisting relate those from cross-listing. Finally, our results show that the bonding hypothesis fails to explain the listing premium and the delisting loss.     

Liquidity and firm investment: Evidence for Latin America

This paper explores the relationship between firms' investment and stock market liquidity. Using a panel of Latin American firms, I find evidence that a higher trading volume and a higher industry-adjusted trading volume are associated with higher firm investment (PPE, Total Assets, and Inventory). This relationship is higher in episodes where the firm decides to issue shares, and it is also greater for firms with tighter financial constraints and better investment opportunities. This evidence is consistent with a mispricing channel, where firms issue and invest the proceeds to take advantage of low cost of capital, or with a cost channel, where liquidity is associated with lower issuance costs. Also, it is less related with an informational channel, where a liquid market helps a manager to take more efficient decisions, since this channel does not necessarily predict an increase in investment, but only more efficient investment.     

Commonality on Euronext: Do location and account type matter?

Using a rich dataset of orders and trades for a sample of stocks listed on four Euronext markets, we apply principal component analysis and provide evidence on the existence and magnitude of commonality in returns, order flow and liquidity. We show that commonality in order flow mainly comes from foreign market members acting for their own account. Proprietary trading is a major driver in trade imbalance and return commonality. Next, we provide evidence on commonality in hidden liquidity. In contrast to commonality in visible depth that is the strongest for large firms, comovements in hidden depth seem to be stronger for small caps. We also show that commonality in returns, order flow and liquidity is not constant throughout the day. The opening of US markets is a key moment where commonality often reaches its maximum level. These findings suggest that most of the commonality is driven by foreigners, generating an increase in systematic liquidity risk, due to foreigners' similar trading behaviors, whose importance evolves throughout the day.     

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.     

Informed trading and liquidity in the Shanghai Stock Exchange

Dufour and Engle (J. Finance (2000) 2467) find evidence of increased presence of informed traders when the NYSE markets are most active. No such evidence, however, can be found by Manganelli (J. Financial Markets (2005) 377) for the infrequently traded stocks. This article investigates the issue of informed trading and its relation to liquidity in Shanghai Stock Exchange. Consistent with the hypothesis that information-based trade exists for all stocks, our findings suggest an increased presence of informed trading in both liquid and illiquid stocks when markets are active. Moreover, for the actively traded stocks, our results support the price formation model of Foster and Viswanathan (Rev. Financial Studies (1990) 593) that activities of informed traders deter uninformed investors from trading, thereby reducing market liquidity.     

Sources of liquidity for NYSE-listed non-US stocks

We examine the components of displayed (quoted) liquidity and the amount of non-displayed liquidity on the NYSE for a sample of non-US stocks. Consistently with prior work, non-US stocks have less displayed liquidity than similar US stocks. Extending prior research, we find that this is true both in the limit order book and on the floor. As Domowitz et al. [Domowitz, I., Glen, J., Madhavan, A., 1998. International cross-listing and order flow migration: Evidence from and emerging market. Journal of Finance 53, 2001–2027] posit, non-US stocks from transparent/linked home markets have more displayed NYSE liquidity when the home market is open but non-US stocks from opaque/non-linked home markets have more NYSE displayed liquidity when the home market is closed. Non-US and US stocks have similar supplies of non-displayed liquidity, consistent with the idea that the conditional nature of non-displayed liquidity allows NYSE traders to mitigate adverse selection problems inherent in trading non-US stocks. Our results imply that non-US stocks have less total (displayed plus non-displayed) liquidity than US stocks.     

Order-to-trade ratios and market liquidity

We study the impact on market liquidity of the introduction of a penalty for high order-to-trade ratios (OTRs), implemented by the Italian Stock Exchange to curtail high-frequency quote submission. We find that the fee is associated with a collapse in the quoted depth of the stocks that make up the bulk of trading in Italian equities and with an increase in price impacts of trading across the treated stocks. Spreads do not change, however. Stocks from a pan-European control sample show no such liquidity changes. Thus, the Italian OTR fee had the effect of making Italian stocks markets more shallow and less resilient. Large stocks are more severely affected than midcaps. We also find evidence of a limited decrease in turnover. Consolidated liquidity, constructed by aggregating across all electronic trading venues for these stocks, decreases just like that on the main exchange. Thus, liquidity was not simply diverted from the main exchange, it was reduced in aggregate.     

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.     

How do designated market makers create value for small-caps?

A poor liquidity level and a high liquidity risk significantly raise the required return for small-cap stocks. Euronext allows these firms to hire designated market makers (DMMs) who guarantee a minimum liquidity supply for a lump sum annual fee. In an event study based on 74 DMM stocks, we find that the contract improves liquidity level, reduces liquidity risk, and generates an average abnormal return of 3.5%. DMMs participate in more trades and incur a trading loss on high quoted-spread days (days when their constraint is likely to bind). Finally, DMMs reduce the size of pricing errors.     

FOREIGN OWNERSHIP RESTRICTIONS AND MARKET SEGMENTATION IN CHINA'S STOCK MARKETS

We study market segmentation in China's stock markets, in which local firms issue two classes of shares: class A shares available only to Chinese citizens and class B shares available only to foreign citizens. Significant stock price discounts are documented for class B shares. We find that the price difference is primarily due to illiquid B‐share markets. Relatively illiquid B‐share stocks have a higher expected return and are priced lower to compensate investors for increased trading costs. However, between the two classes of shares, B‐share prices tend to move more closely with market fundamentals than do A‐share prices. Therefore, we find A‐share premiums rather than B‐share discounts in China's markets. JEL classification: G15     

Liquidity risk and stock returns around the world

The recent global financial crisis demonstrates that market liquidity is a prominent systematic risk globally. We find that local liquidity risk, in addition to the local market, value and size factors, demands a systematic premium across stocks in 11 developed markets. This local pricing premium is smaller in countries where the country-level corporate boards are more effective and where there are less insider trading activities. We also discover that global liquidity risk is a significant pricing factor across all developed country market portfolios after controlling for global market, value, and size factors. The contribution of this risk to the return on a country market portfolio is economically and statistically significant within and across regions.     

The market liquidity of DIAMONDS,Q's,and their underlying stocks

We investigate the market liquidity effects of the introduction of index-tracking stocks for the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DIAMONDS) and the NASDAQ 100 index (Q's). Our main finding is liquidity of the underlying DJIA 30 index stocks improves after the introduction of the exchange-traded fund, largely because of a decline in the cost of informed trading. Further, we find the DIAMONDS has significantly lower liquidity costs over the first 50 days of trading as compared to the portfolio of its component stocks, again primarily because of lower adverse selection costs. Finally, we find weaker but qualitatively similar results for the Q's.