IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/rqfnac/v47y2016i4d10.1007_s11156-015-0525-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Dealers and changing obligations: the case of stub quoting

Author

Listed:
  • Jared F. Egginton

    (Louisiana Tech University)

  • Bonnie F. Ness

    (University of Mississippi)

  • Robert A. Ness

    (University of Mississippi)

Abstract

We examine the liquidity providing behavior of NASDAQ market makers surrounding two periods of changing dealer obligation. The first change in November, 2007 is the relaxation of rule 4613, which required NASDAQ market makers to place two-sided quotes “reasonably related” to the current best bid and offer. The relaxation of this rule permitted NASDAQ market makers to post quotes far away from the prevailing market, a practice frequently referred to as stub quoting. The second is the Securities and Exchange Commission ban on stub quoting in December, 2010, which requires market makers to quote within a predefined distance from market prices. We find evidence that placing restrictions on stub quoting alters market makers’ liquidity providing behavior in both the 2007 and 2010 rule change periods. Stub quoting restrictions increase the time that market makers quote at the NBBO. We also find evidence that the proportion daily volume executed by market makers increases during the 2007 stub quoting restriction. We also find evidence that restrictions on stub quoting narrows spreads and reduces the price impact of trades. However, we find little evidence that stub quoting rules impact the participation of market makers during days with excessive volatility.

Suggested Citation

  • Jared F. Egginton & Bonnie F. Ness & Robert A. Ness, 2016. "Dealers and changing obligations: the case of stub quoting," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 47(4), pages 919-941, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:47:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s11156-015-0525-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shafiqur Rahman & Chandrasekhar Krishnamurti & Alice Lee, 2005. "The Dynamics of Security Trades, Quote Revisions, and Market Depths for Actively Traded Stocks," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 25(2), pages 91-124, September.
    2. Chung, Kee H. & Van Ness, Bonnie F. & Van Ness, Robert A., 1999. "Limit orders and the bid-ask spread," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(2), pages 255-287, August.
    3. Grossman, Sanford J, 1992. "The Informational Role of Upstairs and Downstairs Trading," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 65(4), pages 509-528, October.
    4. Stoll, Hans R, 1978. "The Supply of Dealer Services in Securities Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 33(4), pages 1133-1151, September.
    5. Li, Mingsheng & McCormick, Timothy & Zhao, Xin, 2005. "Order imbalance and liquidity supply: Evidence from the bubble burst of Nasdaq stocks," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 533-555, September.
    6. Barclay, Michael J. & Hendershott, Terrence & Jones, Charles M., 2008. "Order Consolidation, Price Efficiency, and Extreme Liquidity Shocks," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 43(1), pages 93-121, March.
    7. Kee Chung & Chairat Chuwonganant & D. McCormick, 2006. "Order preferencing, adverse-selection costs, and the probability of information-based trading," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 27(4), pages 343-364, December.
    8. Kee H. Chung & Xin Zhao, 2004. "Price And Quantity Quotes On Nasdaq: A Study Of Dealer Quotation Behavior," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 27(4), pages 497-519, December.
    9. Shane A. Corwin & Marc L. Lipson, 2000. "Order Flow and Liquidity around NYSE Trading Halts," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1771-1801, August.
    10. Michael Goldstein & Andriy Shkilko & Bonnie Ness & Robert Ness, 2010. "Inter-market competition for NYSE-listed securities under decimals," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 35(4), pages 371-391, November.
    11. David Porter & Yusif Simaan & Daniel Weaver & David Whitcomb, 2006. "Effect of the Actual Size Rule Under Market Stress," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 26(2), pages 87-103, March.
    12. Shane A. Corwin & Marc L. Lipson, 2000. "Order Flow and Liquidity around NYSE Trading Halts," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1771-1805, August.
    13. Goldstein, Michael A. & Kavajecz, Kenneth A., 2004. "Trading strategies during circuit breakers and extreme market movements," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 301-333, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Hardy Johnson & Brian Roseman, 2017. "Odd Lot Order Aggressiveness And Stealth Trading," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 40(2), pages 249-281, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Imtiaz Mohammad Sifat & Azhar Mohamad, 2019. "Circuit breakers as market stability levers: A survey of research, praxis, and challenges," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 1130-1169, July.
    2. Matthew Clifton, 2010. "Liquidity and Efficiency During Unusual Market Conditions: An Analysis of Short Selling Restrictions and Expiration-Day Procedures on the London Stock Exchange," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 14, July-Dece.
    3. Jurich, Stephen N. & Mishra, Ajay Kumar & Parikh, Bhavik, 2020. "Indecisive algos: Do limit order revisions increase market load?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 28(C).
    4. James Brugler & Oliver Linton, 2014. "Circuit Breakers on the London Stock Exchange: Do they improve subsequent market quality?," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1453, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    5. Wang, Steven Shuye & Xu, Kuan & Zhang, Hao, 2019. "A microstructure study of circuit breakers in the Chinese stock markets," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 57(C).
    6. Clapham, Benjamin & Gomber, Peter & Haferkorn, Martin & Panz, Sven, 2017. "Managing excess volatility: Design and effectiveness of circuit breakers," SAFE Working Paper Series 195, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    7. Kim, Yong H. & Yagüe, José & Yang, J. Jimmy, 2008. "Relative performance of trading halts and price limits: Evidence from the Spanish Stock Exchange," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 197-215.
    8. Goldstein, Michael A. & Kavajecz, Kenneth A., 2004. "Trading strategies during circuit breakers and extreme market movements," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 7(3), pages 301-333, June.
    9. Biais, Bruno & Glosten, Larry & Spatt, Chester, 2005. "Market microstructure: A survey of microfoundations, empirical results, and policy implications," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 217-264, May.
    10. James Brugler & Oliver Linton, 2014. "Single stock circuit breakers on the London Stock Exchange: do they improve subsequent market quality?," CeMMAP working papers CWP07/14, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    11. Du, Yan & Liu, Qianqiu & Rhee, S. Ghon, 2006. "An Anatomy of the Magnet Effect: Evidence from the Korea Stock Exchange High-Frequency Data," CEI Working Paper Series 2005-17, Center for Economic Institutions, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.
    12. Bacidore, Jeffrey M. & Battalio, Robert H. & Jennings, Robert H., 2002. "Depth improvement and adjusted price improvement on the New York stock exchange," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 5(2), pages 169-195, April.
    13. Suchismita Mishra & Le Zhao, 2021. "Order Routing Decisions for a Fragmented Market: A Review," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-32, November.
    14. Kim, Yong H. & Yang, J. Jimmy, 2008. "The effect of price limits on intraday volatility and information asymmetry," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 16(5), pages 522-538, November.
    15. Jurich, Stephen N., 2021. "Does off-exchange trading decrease in the presence of uncertainty?," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 201-213.
    16. Battalio, Robert & Ellul, Andrew & Jennings, Robert, 2005. "Reputation effects in trading on the New York Stock Exchange," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24659, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    17. Griffith, Todd & Clancey-Shang, Danjue, 2023. "Cryptocurrency regulation and market quality," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    18. Chakravarty, Sugato, 2001. "Stealth-trading: Which traders' trades move stock prices?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 61(2), pages 289-307, August.
    19. Hautsch, Nikolaus & Horvath, Akos, 2019. "How effective are trading pauses?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 131(2), pages 378-403.
    20. Chakrabarty, Bidisha & Shaw, Kenneth W., 2012. "Eliminating the 20-F reconciliation from IFRS to U.S. GAAP: Short-term and long-term liquidity effects," Research in Accounting Regulation, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 90-95.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    NASDAQ; Stub quotes; Quoting; Market microstructure;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G1 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets
    • G2 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services
    • G00 - Financial Economics - - General - - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:kap:rqfnac:v:47:y:2016:i:4:d:10.1007_s11156-015-0525-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.