Informed traders of cross-listed shares trade more in the domestic market around earnings releases

This paper examines informed trading and price discovery for Canadian shares cross-listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and the main U.S. exchanges. The domestic Canadian market can absorb higher demand for liquidity but offers no trading cost advantage. During earnings non-announcement periods, the intra-market probability of informed trading (PI) is similar on both national markets, and both national markets contribute to price discovery. The magnitude and elapsed time over which trading volumes are increased when earnings are announced are higher in the domestic Canadian market. Around earnings announcements, PI decreases only on the U.S. market and the Canadian market contributes more to price discovery. To infer the fundamental values of the underlying cross-listed firms, market participants should monitor both markets, and intensify their monitoring of the Canadian market during earnings announcement periods.     

The dynamics of price discovery for cross-listed shares: Evidence from Australia and New Zealand

This paper studies the dynamics of price discovery for markets with bilateral cross-listings. Using a sample of four Australian stocks cross-listed in New Zealand and five New Zealand stocks cross-listed in Australia for the period January 2002 to December 2007, we assess Hasbrouck (1995) information shares and Grammig et al. (2005) conditional information shares over time. We observe that in both cases the home market is dominant in terms of price discovery. However, when studying price discovery over time, we find that the importance of the Australian market (the larger of the two markets) is increasing for both Australian and New Zealand domiciled firms. Finally, using panel regression analysis, we find that the growth in the importance of the Australian market is positively related to the growth in the size of the firm and negatively related to the size of the percentage spread in the Australian market, implying that as firms grow larger and their cost of trading in Australia declines, the Australian market becomes more informative.     

Transmission of shocks from cross-listed markets to the return and volatility of domestic stocks

This paper examines the transmission of information from German and the U.S. markets to domestic markets using daily price and volume data of 264 stocks from 26 countries that are traded in their home country and cross-listed outside their home market as depository receipts (DRs); in the German market as Global Depository Receipts (GDRs) and in the U.S. as American Depository Receipts (ADRs). We identify days with significant news arrivals in a market through minimum thresholds for both significant absolute price change and trading volume. DR returns and volatilities are affected by the shocks in the markets where they are cross-listed controlling for domestic shocks. Contemporaneous and/or lagged shocks to the cross-listed markets are transmitted to domestic stock returns and volatilities. South American DRs are affected mostly by U.S. shocks, while Eastern European DRs show greater reaction to the German shocks.     

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.     

International variations in ESG disclosure – Do cross-listed companies care more?

We study the quantity of ESG disclosure of 1,963 large-cap companies headquartered in 49 countries. Using the Bloomberg ESG disclosure score as the measure of disclosure quantity, we find that firm characteristics explain most of the variation in firms' ESG disclosure, whereas variations in country factors such as corruption and political rights explain less. We empirically examine and extend the theoretical framework of the liability of foreignness in capital markets. Our results support the notion that cross-listed firms disclose more ESG data than those only listed in their home market to mitigate the liability of foreignness in external capital markets. We also find that an increased percentage of foreign ownership does not augment ESG disclosure. Companies which opt to increase foreign equity ownership at home do not encounter the challenges of foreignness. Our findings suggest that cross-listed status is likely to reduce the importance of country factors for variations in ESG disclosure quantity.     

Changing risk exposures of cross-listed firms and market integration

A standard finding is that risk exposures of companies that cross-list tend to increase against the market in which they list, a change typically associated with a decline in the cost of capital. However, this finding is predicated on the assumption that the home and foreign market co-movements are stable over time. By contrast, another common finding is that risk exposures across market indices have increased over time due to international market integration. In this paper, I ask whether the firm-level findings for changing risk exposures are due to the more general changes in market co-movements. Indeed, for a panel of cross-listed firms in the U.S., I find that 72% do not find evidence of breaks in their relationships beyond those derived from their home markets. This finding suggests that the apparent increase in risk exposures for cross-listed firms arises from general market integration trends. Moreover, the remaining 28% of firms tend to have significant breaks after cross-listing, be younger, and have home markets with lower government regulation.     

Does Cross-Listing Benefit the Shareholders? Evidence from Companies in the GCC Countries?

The goal of this study is to estimate the impact of cross-listing on stock returns, on liquidity, and on risk. A sample of 24 companies from the Gulf Cooperation Council countries which cross-listed their stocks in a foreign market over the period 2000–2010 were chosen for study. An event study estimating abnormal returns related to the cross-listing event as well as parametric and nonparametric tests find that there is (1) a significant abnormal return of about 6 % that lasts until 6 days after the cross-listing day and starts fading away thereafter (2) a significant increase in liquidity during the event period for most firms and (3) on average a decrease in risk. Our results also suggest that cross-listing had a small impact on market risk measured by the average beta but led to a decrease in the total risk measured by standard deviation of returns and a decrease in the potential loss measured by the average value at risk at the 5 % confidence. Additionally, an analysis based on the foreign market of secondary listing suggests that the benefit of cross-listing varies with the market of secondary listing. The positive abnormal return is more obvious for companies that cross-listed in Kuwait, Bahrain, and London. The most obvious increase in liquidity is for firms that cross-listed in London or in Bahrain and the biggest decrease in risk is for companies that cross-listed in London. We conclude overall that cross-listing in London benefits the shareholders the most as it leads to positive significant abnormal returns, an increase in liquidity, and a decrease in risk.     

Impact of futures on comovements for UK cross-listed equities

This paper uses La Porta et al.'s [La Porta, R., De Silanes, F.L., Shleifer, A., Vishny, R.W., 1998. Law and finance. Journal of Political Economy 106 (6), 1113–1155] capital markets regulatory classification to analyse the impact of information contained in various futures contracts on the magnitude and persistence of volatility spillovers between markets. The focus here is to examine the impact of futures contracts on comovement between markets. We examine the behavior of foreign cross-listed shares that have listed in different regulatory environments. In particular, the paper analyses spillover effects between foreign cross-listings in tougher, similar and more lax regulatory environments with respect to the relevant domestic indices (FTSE100) and also with the home portfolios of cross-listed equities in the UK. We find that futures variables have a significant impact on the magnitude and persistence of volatility spillovers between markets.     

Crises,contagion and cross-listings

We investigate whether cross-listing shares in the form of depositary receipts in overseas markets benefits investors in emerging market countries during periods of local financial crisis from 1994 to 2002. We regress cumulative abnormal returns for three windows surrounding the crisis events on the cross-listing status while controlling for cross-sectional differences in firm age, trading volume, foreign exposure, disclosure quality and corporate governance. Further, we examine cross-listing effects in countries popularly thought to experience contagious effects of these crises. We find that cross-listed firms react significantly less negatively than non-cross-listed firms, particularly in the aftermath of the crisis. The results on contagious cross-listing effects are however mixed. Our findings are consistent with predictions based on theories of market segmentation as well as differential disclosure/governance between developed and emerging markets. We do not find evidence that foreign investors “panic” during a currency crisis.     

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.     

Price discovery for cross-listed firms with foreign IPOs

We investigate the inter-market return and volatility linkages for an atypical case of firms with foreign IPOs that subsequently cross-listed in their domestic market. In particular, our data set consists of a unique sample of 29 Israeli firms that went public in the US (host market) and then cross-listed in the Israeli market (home market). To estimate the spillover effects, we employ bivariate GARCH models, assuming both constant and dynamic conditional correlation specifications. At the aggregate market level, we find unidirectional mean and volatility spillovers from the US to the Israeli market. For the portfolios of Israeli cross-listed stocks, we report significant spillovers, at both the mean and volatility levels, from the underlying stocks in the Israeli market to their American Depository Receipts (ADRs) but not vice versa. Thus, the home market dominates the host market in the price discovery process in this atypical international cross-listing case, providing new evidence in support of the home bias hypothesis. We also find that external shocks originating from the Middle East peace process have no impact on the conditional correlation between the two markets but external shocks originating from the world and regional markets impact the conditional correlation positively.     

When Do Listed Firms Pay for Market Making in Their Own Stock?

A recent innovation in the equity markets is the introduction of market maker services procured by the listed companies themselves. Using data from the Oslo Stock Exchange, we investigate what motivates issuing firms to pay to improve the secondary market liquidity of their listed shares. By examining the timing of market maker hirings relative to corporate events, we show that hirings are more likely when the firm will interact with the capital markets in the near future. Futhermore, a typical firm employing a designated market maker is more likely to raise capital, repurchase shares, or experience an exit by insiders.     

The relationship between bid–ask spreads and holding periods: The case of Chinese A and B shares

The Chinese stock markets for A (domestic) shares and B (foreign) shares were completely separated. This study examines the relationship between spreads and holding periods across these segmented markets on the same set of firms. Our major findings are as follows. (1) There is a positive relationship between holding periods and bid–ask spreads in the Chinese stock market. (2) Investors' sensitivity toward liquidity is approximately the same in the A and B share markets, even though bid–ask spreads are substantially different across the two markets. These results provide strong support for the theoretical argument of Amihud and Mendelson [Amihud, Y., & Mendelson, H. (1986). Asset pricing and the bid–ask spread. Journal of Financial Economics, 17, 223–249.] that stocks with higher spreads tend to be held by long-term investors. Evidence also suggests that liquidity has a role in explaining the B share discount, although the results are less than conclusive.     

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.     

The relationship between bid–ask spreads and holding periods: The case of Chinese A and B shares

The Chinese stock markets for A (domestic) shares and B (foreign) shares were completely separated. This study examines the relationship between spreads and holding periods across these segmented markets on the same set of firms. Our major findings are as follows. (1) There is a positive relationship between holding periods and bid–ask spreads in the Chinese stock market. (2) Investors' sensitivity toward liquidity is approximately the same in the A and B share markets, even though bid–ask spreads are substantially different across the two markets. These results provide strong support for the theoretical argument of Amihud and Mendelson [Amihud, Y., & Mendelson, H. (1986). Asset pricing and the bid–ask spread. Journal of Financial Economics, 17, 223–249.] that stocks with higher spreads tend to be held by long-term investors. Evidence also suggests that liquidity has a role in explaining the B share discount, although the results are less than conclusive.     

The “make or take” decision in an electronic market: Evidence on the evolution of liquidity

This paper uses experimental asset markets to investigate the evolution of liquidity in an electronic limit order market. Our market setting includes salient features of electronic limit order markets, as well as informed traders and liquidity traders. We focus on the strategies of the traders and how these are affected by trader type, characteristics of the market, and characteristics of the asset. We find that informed traders use more limit orders than do liquidity traders. Our main result is that liquidity provision shifts as trading progresses, with informed traders increasingly providing liquidity in markets. The change in the behavior of the informed traders seems to be in response to the dynamic adjustment of prices to information; they take (provide) liquidity when the value of their information is high (low). Thus, a market-making role emerges endogenously in our electronic markets and is ultimately adopted by the traders who are least subject to adverse selection when placing limit orders.     

The effect of market segmentation on stock prices: The China syndrome

China has an A-share market that is open only to local investors and a B-share market that is open only to foreign investors. Contrary to what has been observed in other markets with a similar segmented structure, the China B shares trade at a discount relative to the A shares. We show that the phenomenon can still be explained by basic economic principles. Specifically, the existence of the H-share and the “red-chip” markets in Hong Kong provide good substitutes for the B-share market. We find that when more H shares and red chips are listed in Hong Kong, the B-share discount becomes larger. This is consistent with the model of differential demand elasticity proposed by Stulz and Wasserfallen (Stulz, R., Wasserfallen, W., 1995. Review of Financial Studies 8, 1019–1057).     

Price Interactions in a Sequential Global Market: Evidence from the Cross-listed Stocks

In this paper, we investigate the pattern of dynamic interactions among the prices of those stocks that are cross-listed on the three major stock markets of the world, i.e. New York, London and Tokyo. Major findings are: first, regardless of the nationality of stocks, innovations in the 'home' market returns are always fed into the returns in the 'overseas' markets, with the former causing the latter in the Granger sense. However, innovations in the New York market returns of foreign stocks are fed back into their respective home markets, contributing to the price discovery there. Second, the 'succeeding' overseas market, which operates immediately after the home market, plays a dual-role: it conducts the home market innovations to the next-opening overseas market, as well as adds its own innovations. Third, the exchange rate changes substantially influence the overseas market returns, but not the home market returns. The exchange rates appear to play a role in the transmission mechanism mainly via the inter-market price parity.     

Price discovery of cross-listed firms

This paper examines the contribution of cross-listing to price discovery for a unique and comprehensive sample of firms listed abroad. Using an extended measure of the common factor weight, we find that foreign market contribution to price discovery is more important for multiple-listed firms compared to cross-listed ones. Our results also show that US exchanges are more conductive to price discovery than do foreign European markets. On a univariate regression, we find new evidence that order driven markets and those which are more integrated with the world contribute significantly to price discovery of stocks listed abroad. On a multivariate regression, information asymmetry measures seem to have the most important effect on foreign market contribution to price determination.     

Competition in securities markets: the impact on liquidity

Competition for order flow is widely documented for U.S. markets, but is a relatively new phenomenon in European equities trading. Only with the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive, which went into effect in November 2007, did new trading venues emerge in Europe that for the first time ever seriously threatened established exchanges. Chi-X, one of the new competitors, has gained a considerable market share, eroding the traditional exchanges’ share of equities trading volumes. As the proliferation of new trading venues in Europe increases the danger of market fragmentation, this paper analyzes the potentially positive liquidity implications of a new trading venue. To this end, we examine the impact of the Chi-X market entry in French blue-chip equities on the liquidity of their home market. Our findings suggest that in consequence of the new competitor’s market entry, liquidity in the most actively traded stocks was enhanced on the home market during the observation period. This improvement exceeds the general European liquidity trend measured by a matching firm approach, which implies that despite fragmentation of order flow, market quality may even be enhanced.