Hidden liquidity: An analysis of order exposure strategies in electronic stock markets

Many stock exchanges choose to reduce market transparency by allowing traders to hide some or all of their order size. We study the costs and benefits of order exposure and test hypotheses regarding hidden order usage using a sample of Euronext-Paris stocks, where hidden orders represent 44% of the sample order volume. Our results support the hypothesis that hidden orders are associated with a decreased probability of full execution and increased average time to completion, and fail to support the alternate hypothesis that order exposure causes defensive traders to withdraw from the market. However, exposing rather than hiding order size increases average execution costs. We assess the extent to which non-displayed size is truly hidden and document that the presence and magnitude of hidden orders can be predicted to a significant, but imperfect, degree based on observable order attributes, firm characteristics, and market conditions. Overall, the results indicate that the option to hide order size is valuable, in particular, to patient traders.     

Economic valuation of liquidity timing

This paper conducts a horse-race of different liquidity proxies using dynamic asset allocation strategies to evaluate the short-horizon predictive ability of liquidity on monthly stock returns. We assess the economic value of the out-of-sample power of empirical models based on different liquidity measures and find three key results: liquidity timing leads to tangible economic gains; a risk-averse investor will pay a high performance fee to switch from a dynamic portfolio strategy based on various liquidity measures to one that conditions on the Zeros measure (Lesmond et al., 1999); the Zeros measure outperforms other liquidity measures because of its robustness in extreme market conditions. These findings are stable over time and robust to controlling for existing market return predictors or considering risk-adjusted returns.     

Latency and liquidity provision in a limit order book

We use a recent, high-quality data set from Nasdaq to perform an empirical analysis of order flow in a limit order book before and after the arrival of a market order. For each of the stocks that we study, we identify a sequence of distinct phases across which the net flow of orders differs considerably. We note that some of our results are consistent with the widely reported phenomenon of stimulated refill, but that others are not. We therefore propose alternative mechanical and strategic motivations for the behaviour that we observe. Based on our findings, we argue that strategic liquidity providers consider both adverse selection and expected waiting costs when deciding how to act.     

Limit order book,anonymity and market liquidity: evidence from the Sydney Futures Exchange

This study examines the impact of the removal of broker mnemonics on the Sydney Futures Exchange. Early research finds that a decrease in transparency reduces liquidity in the market, whereas more recent research finds that reduced transparency improves market quality. Results of the present study indicate an improvement in liquidity after the removal of broker mnemonics. There is a significant increase in quoted depth and trading volume, and a significant decrease in quoted spreads in the 90 day Bank Accepted Bill, 3 year Treasury Bond and 10 year Treasury Bond Futures. This improvement in liquidity is robust to the length of the event window around the structural change and trading in a control market.     

The liquidity risk of liquid hedge funds

This paper evaluates hedge funds that grant favorable redemption terms to investors. Within this group of purportedly liquid funds, high net inflow funds subsequently outperform low net inflow funds by 4.79% per year after adjusting for risk. The return impact of fund flows is stronger when funds embrace liquidity risk, when market liquidity is low, and when funding liquidity, as measured by the Treasury-Eurodollar spread, aggregate hedge fund flows, and prime broker stock returns, is tight. In keeping with an agency explanation, funds with strong incentives to raise capital, low manager option deltas, and no manager capital co-invested are more likely to take on excessive liquidity risk. These results resonate with the theory of funding liquidity by Brunnermeier and Pedersen (2009).     

A market-clearing role for inefficiency on a limit order book

Limit order markets with stationary dynamics attract equal volumes of market orders and uncanceled limit orders, equalizing the supply and demand for liquidity and immediacy. To maintain this balance, market orders must share any benefit obtained by limit order traders from more efficient trading conditions, such as better order queuing policies. Therefore an efficient market places a low price on immediacy, producing small bid–ask spreads. Furthermore, when price-discreteness leads to a mainly constant spread, cutting the price tick raises surplus. This is modeled with a stochastic sequential game, using stationarity considerations to bypass direct analysis of traders’ intricate market forecasts.     

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.     

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.     

Internal liquidity risk,financial bullwhip effects,and corporate bond yield spreads: Supply chain perspectives

This study explores internal liquidity risk (ILR) and financial bullwhip effects on corporate bond yield spreads along supply chain counterparties by employing American market data from year 1997 to 2008. This study finds that the ILRs of suppliers and customers positively affect a firm’s bond yield spreads and the effects of customers’ ILRs are greater. This research also finds a financial bullwhip effect that the ILR effect becomes greater upwardly along the supply chain counterparties. The results are robust when controlling for well-known spread determinant variables.     

Money and liquidity in financial markets

We argue that there is a connection between the interbank market for liquidity and the broader financial markets, which has its basis in demand for liquidity by banks. Tightness in the market for liquidity leads banks to engage in what we term “liquidity pull-back,” which involves selling financial assets either by banks directly or by levered investors. Empirical tests on the stock market are supportive. Tighter interbank markets are associated with relatively more volume in more liquid stocks; selling pressure, especially in more liquid stocks; and transitory negative returns. We control for market-wide uncertainty and in the process also contribute to the literature on portfolio rebalancing. Our general point is that money matters in financial markets.     

Sales order backlogs and momentum profits

Winner stocks have higher changes in sales order backlogs and a sales order backlog factor is significant in explaining various winner minus loser returns and often reduces the αs by big margins. We argue that this factor is a proxy for innovation in demand in the economy and it is likely to relate to expected growth risks and future business conditions.     

A dynamic limit order market with fast and slow traders

This paper considers the role of high-frequency trading in a dynamic limit order market. Fast traders? ability to revise their quotes quickly after news arrivals helps to reduce the inefficiency that is rooted in the risk of being picked off, which increases trade. However, their presence induces slow traders to strategically submit limit orders with a lower execution probability, thereby reducing trade. Because speed is a source of market power, it enables fast traders to extract rents from other market participants and triggers a costly arms race that reduces social welfare. The model generates a number of testable implications concerning the effects of high-frequency trading in limit order markets.     

Funding liquidity and equity liquidity in the subprime crisis period: Evidence from the ETF market

Using index and financial exchange-traded funds (ETFs), this study explores the relation between funding liquidity and equity liquidity during the subprime crisis period. Our empirical results show that a higher degree of funding illiquidity leads to an increase in bid–ask spread and a reduction in both market depth and net buying imbalance. Such findings indicate that an increase in funding liquidity can improve equity liquidity, with a stronger effect for the financial ETFs than for the index ETFs. Our study provides a better overall understanding of the effect of the liquidity–supplier funding constraint during the subprime crisis period.     

The strategic specialist and imperfect competition in a limit order market

The empirical literature suggests that the limit order book contains information that might be used by the specialist to his own advantage. I develop a model where there is a strategic specialist who competes against a limit order book and has information about supply. The presence of a strategic specialist in an imperfectly competitive limit order book market induces non-monotonicity of market indicators with respect to the variance of liquidation value. Moreover, the existence of private information about supply significantly affects market performance as it induces, among other effects, lower market liquidity. Finally, this model suggests another link between Kyle’s (1985, 1989) [Kyle, A., 1985. Continuous auctions and insider trading. Econometrica 53, 1315–1336, Kyle, A., 1989. Informed speculators with imperfect competition. Review of Economic Studies 56, 317–356] and Glosten and Milgrom’s (1985) [Glosten, L., Milgrom, P., 1985. Bid, ask and transaction prices in a specialist market with heterogeneously informed markets. Journal of Financial Economics 14, 71–100] models by allowing for strategic behaviour of the specialist.     

Understanding commonality in liquidity around the world

We examine how commonality in liquidity varies across countries and over time in ways related to supply determinants (funding liquidity of financial intermediaries) and demand determinants (correlated trading behavior of international and institutional investors, incentives to trade individual securities, and investor sentiment) of liquidity. Commonality in liquidity is greater in countries with and during times of high market volatility (especially, large market declines), greater presence of international investors, and more correlated trading activity. Our evidence is more reliably consistent with demand-side explanations and challenges the ability of the funding liquidity hypothesis to help us understand important aspects of financial market liquidity around the world, even during the recent financial crisis.     

Decomposing swap spreads

We analyze a six-factor model for Treasury bonds, corporate bonds, and swap rates and decompose swap spreads into three components: a convenience yield from holding Treasuries, a credit risk element from the underlying LIBOR rate, and a factor specific to the swap market. The convenience yield is by far the largest component of spreads. There is a discernible contribution from credit risk as well as from a swap-specific factor with higher variability which in certain periods is related to hedging activity in the mortgage-backed security market. The model also sheds light on the relation between AA hazard rates and the spread between LIBOR rates and General Collateral repo rates and on the level of the riskless rate compared to swap and Treasury rates.     

Sell-order liquidity and the cross-section of expected stock returns

We estimate buy- and sell-order illiquidity measures (lambdas) for a comprehensive sample of NYSE stocks. We show that sell-order liquidity is priced more strongly than buy-order liquidity in the cross-section of equity returns. Indeed, our analysis indicates that the liquidity premium in equities emanates predominantly from the sell-order side. We also find that the average difference between sell and buy lambdas is generally positive throughout our sample period. Both buy and sell lambdas are significantly positively correlated with measures of funding liquidity such as the TED spread as well option implied volatility.     

On the power of cross-sectional and multivariate tests of the CAPM

This paper examines the power of the cross-sectional and multivariate tests of the CAPM under ideal conditions. When the CAPM is true the positively weighted market portfolio is MV-efficient and securities plot on the security market line. When the CAPM is false an alternative asset pricing model determines prices. An examination of the population intercepts, slopes and R² from cross-sectional regressions of expected returns on betas indicates that all three are unreliable indicators of whether the CAPM holds. Simulation analysis of the power of the cross-sectional tests expands on and reinforces the analysis based on the population values. The Gibbons et al. (1989) multivariate test fares much better.     

The divergence of liquidity commonality in the cross-section of stocks

This paper demonstrates that the cross-sectional variation of liquidity commonality has increased over the period 1963–2005. The divergence of systematic liquidity can be explained by patterns in institutional ownership over the sample period. We document that our findings are associated with similar patterns in systematic risk. Our analysis also indicates that the ability to diversify systematic risk and aggregate liquidity shocks by holding large-cap stocks has declined. The evidence suggests that the fragility of the US equity market to unanticipated events has increased over the past few decades.