IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this article or follow this journal

Transparency and market quality: Evidence from SuperMontage

  • Chung, Kee H.
  • Chuwonganant, Chairat
Registered author(s):

    In this study, we examine the effect of pre-trade transparency on market quality using data before and after the introduction of SuperMontage. Our results show that both bid-ask spreads and return volatility declined significantly after the implementation of SuperMontage. In addition, SuperMontage led to significant improvements in the SEC Rule 605 execution quality measures (e.g., faster executions and higher fill rates). Overall, our results indicate that SuperMontage improved market and execution quality on NASDAQ through greater pre-trade transparency and the integrated, more efficient quotation and trading system.

    If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/B6WJD-4T0MMJ5-1/2/ff0f812d7491f9f5988f2ac3983f96c6
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.

    Article provided by Elsevier in its journal Journal of Financial Intermediation.

    Volume (Year): 18 (2009)
    Issue (Month): 1 (January)
    Pages: 93-111

    as
    in new window

    Handle: RePEc:eee:jfinin:v:18:y:2009:i:1:p:93-111
    Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/622875

    References listed on IDEAS
    Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

    as in new window
    1. Gemmill, Gordon, 1996. " Transparency and Liquidity: A Study of Block Trades on the London Stock Exchange under Different Publication Rules," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(5), pages 1765-90, December.
    2. Madhavan, Ananth, 1995. "Consolidation, Fragmentation, and the Disclosure of Trading Information," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 8(3), pages 579-603.
    3. Bessembinder, Hendrik & Maxwell, William & Venkataraman, Kumar, 2006. "Market transparency, liquidity externalities, and institutional trading costs in corporate bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(2), pages 251-288, November.
    4. Lee, Charles M C & Ready, Mark J, 1991. " Inferring Trade Direction from Intraday Data," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(2), pages 733-46, June.
    5. Madhavan, Ananth, 1996. "Security Prices and Market Transparency," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 255-283, July.
    6. Bloomfield, Robert & O'Hara, Maureen, 1999. "Market Transparency: Who Wins and Who Loses?," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(1), pages 5-35.
    7. Pagano, Marco & Roell, Ailsa, 1996. " Transparency and Liquidity: A Comparison of Auction and Dealer Markets with Informed Trading," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(2), pages 579-611, June.
    8. Hasbrouck, Joel, 1993. "Assessing the Quality of a Security Market: A New Approach to Transaction-Cost Measurement," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(1), pages 191-212.
    9. Naik, Narayan Y & Neuberger, Anthony & Viswanathan, S, 1999. "Trade Disclosure Regulations in Markets with Negotiated Trades," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(4), pages 873-900.
    10. Shmuel Baruch, 2005. "Who Benefits from an Open Limit-Order Book?," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(4), pages 1267-1306, July.
    11. He, Chen & Odders-White, Elizabeth & Ready, Mark J., 2006. "The impact of preferencing on execution quality," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 246-273, August.
    12. Bessembinder, Hendrik, 2003. "Issues in assessing trade execution costs," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 233-257, May.
    13. Flood, Mark D, et al, 1999. "Quote Disclosure and Price Discovery in Multiple-Dealer Financial Markets," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 12(1), pages 37-59.
    14. Zhao, Xin & Chung, Kee H., 2007. "Information Disclosure and Market Quality: The Effect of SEC Rule 605 on Trading Costs," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 42(03), pages 657-682, September.
    15. Boehmer, Ekkehart, 2005. "Dimensions of execution quality: Recent evidence for US equity markets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(3), pages 553-582, December.
    16. Madhavan, Ananth & Porter, David & Weaver, Daniel, 2005. "Should securities markets be transparent?," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 265-287, August.
    17. Lyons, Richard K., 1996. "Optimal Transparency in a Dealer Market with an Application to Foreign Exchange," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 5(3), pages 225-254, July.
    18. repec:ner:tilbur:urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-3106474 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Bloomfield, Robert & O'Hara, Maureen, 2000. "Can transparent markets survive?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 55(3), pages 425-459, March.
    20. Biais, Bruno, 1993. " Price Information and Equilibrium Liquidity in Fragmented and Centralized Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(1), pages 157-85, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

    When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jfinin:v:18:y:2009:i:1:p:93-111. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)

    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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

    If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

    This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.