IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/rfinst/v32y2019i3p1068-1101..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Why Discrete Price Fragments U.S. Stock Exchanges and Disperses Their Fee Structures

Author

Listed:
  • Yong Chao
  • Chen Yao
  • Mao Ye

Abstract

Stock exchange operators compete for order flow by setting “make” fees for limit orders and “take” fees for market orders. When traders can quote continuous prices, exchange operators compete on total fee, because traders can choose prices that perfectly neutralize any fee division. The 1-cent minimum tick size, however, prevents traders from neutralizing fee division. The nonneutrality of division between make and take fees (1) allows an exchange operator to establish exchanges that differ in fee structure to engage in second-degree price discrimination and (2) destroys the Bertrand equilibrium, leads to frequent fee changes, and encourages entries of new exchanges.Received May 29, 2016; editorial decision April 19, 2018 by Editor Robin Greenwood. Authors have furnished an Internet Appendix, which is available on the Oxford University Press Web site next to the link to the final published paper online.

Suggested Citation

  • Yong Chao & Chen Yao & Mao Ye, 2019. "Why Discrete Price Fragments U.S. Stock Exchanges and Disperses Their Fee Structures," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(3), pages 1068-1101.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:rfinst:v:32:y:2019:i:3:p:1068-1101.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/rfs/hhy073
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

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

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Yong Chao & Chen Yao & Mao Ye, 2017. "Discrete Pricing and Market Fragmentation: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 107(5), pages 196-199, May.
    2. Pankaj Kumar, 2021. "Deep Hawkes Process for High-Frequency Market Making," Papers 2109.15110, arXiv.org.
    3. Babus, Ana & Parlatore, Cecilia, 2022. "Strategic fragmented markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 145(3), pages 876-908.
    4. Li, Sida & Ye, Mao & Zheng, Miles, 2023. "Refusing the best price?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 147(2), pages 317-337.
    5. Comerton-Forde, Carole & Grégoire, Vincent & Zhong, Zhuo, 2019. "Inverted fee structures, tick size, and market quality," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 141-164.
    6. Giovanni Cespa & Xavier Vives, 2022. "Exchange Competition, Entry, and Welfare," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 35(5), pages 2570-2624.
    7. Franzoni, Francesco & Di Maggio, Marco & Egan, Mark, 2019. "The Value of Intermediation in the Stock Market," CEPR Discussion Papers 13936, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    8. Marco Di Maggio & Mark L. Egan & Francesco Franzoni, 2019. "The Value of Intermediation in the Stock Market," NBER Working Papers 26147, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Poutré, Cédric & Dionne, Georges & Yergeau, Gabriel, 2023. "International high-frequency arbitrage for cross-listed stocks," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    10. Steffen Juranek & Uwe Walz, 2020. "Organizational Design, Competition, and Financial Exchanges," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 122(1), pages 132-163, January.
    11. Brolley, Michael & Malinova, Katya, 2021. "Informed liquidity provision in a limit order market," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    12. Haoyang Liu & Zhaogang Song & James Vickery, 2021. "Defragmenting Markets: Evidence from Agency MBS," Staff Reports 965, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    13. Bernales, Alejandro & Garrido, Nicolás & Sagade, Satchit & Valenzuela, Marcela & Westheide, Christian, 2020. "Trader Competition in Fragmented Markets: Liquidity Supply versus Picking-off Risk," SAFE Working Paper Series 234, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2020.
    14. Budish, Eric B. & Lee, Robin S. & Shim, John J., 2020. "A Theory of Stock Exchange Competition and Innovation: Will the Market Fix the Market?," Working Papers 301, The University of Chicago Booth School of Business, George J. Stigler Center for the Study of the Economy and the State.
    15. Eric Budish & Peter Cramton & Albert S. Kyle & Jeongmin Lee & David Malec, 2022. "Flow Trading," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 146, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    16. Eric Budish & Robin S. Lee & John J. Shim, 2019. "A Theory of Stock Exchange Competition and Innovation: Will the Market Fix the Market?," NBER Working Papers 25855, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Brauneis, Alexander & Mestel, Roland & Riordan, Ryan & Theissen, Erik, 2022. "The anatomy of a fee change — evidence from cryptocurrency markets," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 152-167.
    18. Daniel Chen & Darrell Duffie, 2020. "Market Fragmentation," NBER Working Papers 26828, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Roberto Riccó & Barbara Rindi & Duane J. Seppi, 2021. "Optimal Market Asset Pricing," Working Papers 675, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    20. Albuquerque, Rui & Song, Shiyun & Yao, Chen, 2017. "The Price Effects of Liquidity Shocks: A Study of SEC’s Tick-Size Experiment," CEPR Discussion Papers 12486, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    21. Cimon, David A., 2021. "Broker routing decisions in limit order markets," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    22. Sarah Draus, 2012. "Market Power on Exchanges: Linking Price Impact to Trading Fees," CSEF Working Papers 490, Centre for Studies in Economics and Finance (CSEF), University of Naples, Italy.
    23. Irtisam, Rasheek & Sokolov, Konstantin, 2023. "Do stock exchanges specialize? Evidence from the New Jersey transaction tax proposal," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).

    More about this item

    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:oup:rfinst:v:32:y:2019:i:3:p:1068-1101.. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sfsssea.html .

    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.