IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/quantf/v15y2015i5p773-793.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is market impact a measure of the information value of trades? Market response to liquidity vs. informed metaorders

Author

Listed:
  • C. Gomes
  • H. Waelbroeck

Abstract

We examine a data-set of institutional trades where approximately one-fourth of the trades were labelled as having been created for cash flow purposes. We aggregate near-overlapping trades into metaorders and consider information, market impact and metaorder size. We find that during the execution, the functional form and scale of market impact are similar for cash flows and other metaorders. Differences arise in the price reversion following the end of a metaorder. For cash flows, presumed to have no true information content, the impact reverts almost completely on average in two to five days. For other metaorders, we find that reversion erases about one-third of the peak impact: for each size, price reverts to the average execution price, leaving no immediate profits after accounting for trading costs. Observed mark-to-market profits on metaorders that aggregate multiple portfolio manager orders, new metaorders and Nasdaq-listed stocks suggest that these metaorders are more informed than the average. Vice-versa, we find mark-to-market losses are more likely to occur on cash flows, metaorders in large-cap stocks, metaorders that follow momentum and additions to a prior position seeking to take advantage of an improved price. The complete price reversion for cash flows suggests that the mechanical permanent impact that is considered in no-quasi-arbitrage arguments would be much smaller than the information in typical institutional metaorders.

Suggested Citation

  • C. Gomes & H. Waelbroeck, 2015. "Is market impact a measure of the information value of trades? Market response to liquidity vs. informed metaorders," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(5), pages 773-793, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:quantf:v:15:y:2015:i:5:p:773-793
    DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2014.963140
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14697688.2014.963140
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14697688.2014.963140?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. Sanford Grossman, 1989. "The Informational Role of Prices," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262572141, December.
    2. Hasbrouck, Joel, 2007. "Empirical Market Microstructure: The Institutions, Economics, and Econometrics of Securities Trading," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780195301649.
    3. Anna Obizhaeva, 2009. "Portfolio Transitions and Stock Price Dynamics," Working Papers w0224, Center for Economic and Financial Research (CEFIR).
    4. Anna Obizhaeva, 2009. "Portfolio Transitions and Stock Price Dynamics," Working Papers w0224, New Economic School (NES).
    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. Emilio Said & Ahmed Bel Hadj Ayed & Damien Thillou & Jean-Jacques Rabeyrin & Frédéric Abergel, 2020. "Market Impact: A Systematic Study of the High Frequency Options Market," Post-Print hal-02014248, HAL.
    2. Shanshan Wang, 2017. "Trading strategies for stock pairs regarding to the cross-impact cost," Papers 1701.03098, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2017.
    3. Fr'ed'eric Bucci & Michael Benzaquen & Fabrizio Lillo & Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, 2019. "Slow decay of impact in equity markets: insights from the ANcerno database," Papers 1901.05332, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2019.
    4. Emilio Said & Ahmed Bel Hadj Ayed & Damien Thillou & Jean-Jacques Rabeyrin & Frédéric Abergel, 2019. "Market Impact: A Systematic Study of the High Frequency Options Market," Working Papers hal-02014248, HAL.
    5. Yamamoto, Ryuichi, 2019. "Dynamic Predictor Selection And Order Splitting In A Limit Order Market," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 23(5), pages 1757-1792, July.
    6. Mathias Pohl & Alexander Ristig & Walter Schachermayer & Ludovic Tangpi, 2017. "The amazing power of dimensional analysis: Quantifying market impact," Papers 1702.05434, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2017.
    7. Emilio Said & Ahmed Bel Hadj Ayed & Damien Thillou & Jean-Jacques Rabeyrin & Fr'ed'eric Abergel, 2019. "Market Impact: A Systematic Study of the High Frequency Options Market," Papers 1902.05418, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    8. Fabrizio Lillo, 2021. "Order flow and price formation," Papers 2105.00521, arXiv.org.
    9. Emilio Said, 2022. "Market Impact: Empirical Evidence, Theory and Practice," Working Papers hal-03668669, HAL.
    10. Emilio Said & Ahmed Bel Hadj Ayed & Alexandre Husson & Frédéric Abergel, 2018. "Market Impact: A systematic study of limit orders," Working Papers hal-01561128, HAL.
    11. Emilio Said, 2022. "Market Impact: Empirical Evidence, Theory and Practice," Papers 2205.07385, arXiv.org.
    12. Emilio Said & Ahmed Bel Hadj Ayed & Alexandre Husson & Frédéric Abergel, 2018. "Market Impact: A Systematic Study of Limit Orders," Post-Print hal-01561128, HAL.
    13. Paul Jusselin & Mathieu Rosenbaum, 2020. "No‐arbitrage implies power‐law market impact and rough volatility," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1309-1336, October.
    14. Paul Jusselin & Mathieu Rosenbaum, 2018. "No-arbitrage implies power-law market impact and rough volatility," Papers 1805.07134, arXiv.org.
    15. Emilio Said & Ahmed Bel Hadj Ayed & Alexandre Husson & Fr'ed'eric Abergel, 2018. "Market Impact: A Systematic Study of Limit Orders," Papers 1802.08502, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    16. Frédéric Bucci & Michael Benzaquen & Fabrizio Lillo & Jean-Philippe Bouchaud, 2019. "Slow Decay of Impact in Equity Markets: Insights from the ANcerno Database," Post-Print hal-02323357, HAL.

    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. Emilio Said, 2022. "Market Impact: Empirical Evidence, Theory and Practice," Working Papers hal-03668669, HAL.
    2. Jean-Philippe Bouchaud & J. Doyne Farmer & Fabrizio Lillo, 2008. "How markets slowly digest changes in supply and demand," Papers 0809.0822, arXiv.org.
    3. Tugkan Tuzun, 2013. "Are leveraged and inverse ETFs the new portfolio insurers?," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2013-48, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    4. Emilio Said, 2022. "Market Impact: Empirical Evidence, Theory and Practice," Papers 2205.07385, arXiv.org.
    5. Yew-Kwang Ng & Xiaokai Yang, 2005. "Specialization, Information, And Growth: A Sequential Equilibrium Analysis," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: An Inframarginal Approach To Trade Theory, chapter 20, pages 447-474, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Takahashi, Makoto & Watanabe, Toshiaki & Omori, Yasuhiro, 2016. "Volatility and quantile forecasts by realized stochastic volatility models with generalized hyperbolic distribution," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 437-457.
    7. Hallin, Marc & La Vecchia, Davide, 2020. "A Simple R-estimation method for semiparametric duration models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 218(2), pages 736-749.
    8. Andres, Christian & Cumming, Douglas & Karabiber, Timur & Schweizer, Denis, 2014. "Do markets anticipate capital structure decisions? — Feedback effects in equity liquidity," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 133-156.
    9. J. Doyne Farmer & N. Zamani, 2007. "Mechanical vs. informational components of price impact," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 55(2), pages 189-200, January.
    10. Michael D. Bauer & Eric T. Swanson, 2023. "An Alternative Explanation for the "Fed Information Effect"," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 113(3), pages 664-700, March.
    11. Marina Di Giacinto & Claudio Tebaldi & Tai-Ho Wang, 2021. "Optimal order execution under price impact: A hybrid model," Papers 2112.02228, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2022.
    12. J. Doyne Farmer, 2002. "Market force, ecology and evolution," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(5), pages 895-953, November.
    13. Gibson, Rajna & Habib, Michel A. & Ziegler, Alexandre, 2014. "Reinsurance or securitization: The case of natural catastrophe risk," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 79-100.
    14. Thomas A. P. de Boer & Cornelis Gardebroek & Joost M. E. Pennings & Andres Trujillo‐Barrera, 2022. "Intraday liquidity in soybean complex futures markets," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 42(7), pages 1189-1211, July.
    15. Gubiec, T. & Wiliński, M., 2015. "Intra-day variability of the stock market activity versus stationarity of the financial time series," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 432(C), pages 216-221.
    16. Yuta Kurose & Yasuhiro Omori, 2016. "Multiple-block Dynamic Equicorrelations with Realized Measures, Leverage and Endogeneity," CIRJE F-Series CIRJE-F-1022, CIRJE, Faculty of Economics, University of Tokyo.
    17. Johannes Bleher & Michael Bleher & Thomas Dimpfl, 2020. "From orders to prices: A stochastic description of the limit order book to forecast intraday returns," Papers 2004.11953, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    18. Brock, W.A. & Hommes, C.H., 1997. "Models of Compelxity in Economics and Finance," Working papers 9706, Wisconsin Madison - Social Systems.
    19. Giese, Julia & Nelson, Benjamin & Tanaka, Misa & Tarashev, Nikola, 2013. "Financial Stability Paper No 21: How could macroprudential policy affect financial system resilience and credit? Lessons from the literature," Bank of England Financial Stability Papers 21, Bank of England.
    20. LeBaron, Blake & Arthur, W. Brian & Palmer, Richard, 1999. "Time series properties of an artificial stock market," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 23(9-10), pages 1487-1516, September.

    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:taf:quantf:v:15:y:2015:i:5:p:773-793. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RQUF20 .

    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.