IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/fip/fedgfe/2023-33.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Optimal Bidder Selection in Clearing House Default Auctions

Author

Abstract

Default auctions at central counterparties (or 'CCPs') are critically important to financial stability. However, due to their unique features and challenges, standard auction theory results do not immediately apply. This paper presents a model for CCP default auctions that incorporates the CCP's non-standard objective of maximizing success above a threshold rather than revenue, the key question of who participates in the auction and the potential for information leakage affecting private portfolio valuations. We show that an entry fee, by appropriately inducingmembers to participate or not, can maximize the probability the auction succeeds. The result is novel, both in auction theory and as a mechanism for CCP auction design.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodney Garratt & David Murphy & Travis D. Nesmith & Xiaopeng Wu, 2023. "Optimal Bidder Selection in Clearing House Default Auctions," Finance and Economics Discussion Series 2023-033, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (U.S.).
    • Handle: RePEc:fip:fedgfe:2023-33
    DOI: 10.17016/FEDS.2023.033
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.federalreserve.gov/econres/feds/files/2023033pap.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17016/FEDS.2023.033?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Landsberger, Michael, 2007. "Non-existence of monotone equilibria in games with correlated signals," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 132(1), pages 119-136, January.
    2. Songzi Du & Haoxiang Zhu, 2017. "What is the Optimal Trading Frequency in Financial Markets?," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 84(4), pages 1606-1651.
    3. Han Hong & Matthew Shum, 2002. "Increasing Competition and the Winner's Curse: Evidence from Procurement," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 69(4), pages 871-898.
    4. Fernando V. Cerezetti & Emmanouil N. Karimalis & Ujwal Shreyas & Anannit Sumawong, 2019. "Market liquidity, closeout procedures and initial margin for CCPs," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(7), pages 599-631, May.
    5. Murphy, David & Nahai-Williamson, Paul, 2014. "Financial Stability Paper 30: Dear Prudence, won’t you come out to play? Approaches to the analysis of CCP default fund adequacy," Bank of England Financial Stability Papers 30, Bank of England.
    6. Milgrom,Paul, 2004. "Putting Auction Theory to Work," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521536721.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Paul Klemperer, 2007. "Bidding Markets," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(1), pages 1-47.
    2. Rolfe, John & Windle, Jill, 2006. "Using Field Experiments to Explore the Use of Multiple Bidding Rounds in Conservation Auctions," Discussion Papers 25801, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Vivek Bhattacharya & James W. Roberts & Andrew Sweeting, 2014. "Regulating bidder participation in auctions," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(4), pages 675-704, December.
    4. Kagel, John & Pevnitskaya, Svetlana & Ye, Lixin, 2008. "Indicative bidding: An experimental analysis," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 62(2), pages 697-721, March.
    5. De Silva, Dakshina G. & Dunne, Timothy & Kankanamge, Anuruddha & Kosmopoulou, Georgia, 2008. "The impact of public information on bidding in highway procurement auctions," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 150-181, January.
    6. John Rolfe & Jill Windle & Juliana McCosker, 2009. "Testing and Implementing the Use of Multiple Bidding Rounds in Conservation Auctions: A Case Study Application," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 57(3), pages 287-303, September.
    7. Hickman Brent R. & Hubbard Timothy P. & Sağlam Yiğit, 2012. "Structural Econometric Methods in Auctions: A Guide to the Literature," Journal of Econometric Methods, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 67-106, August.
    8. Lorentziadis, Panos L., 2016. "Optimal bidding in auctions from a game theory perspective," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 248(2), pages 347-371.
    9. Berndsen, Ron, 2020. "Five Fundamental Questions on Central Counterparties," Other publications TiSEM 1f3bd844-92ab-4104-8f57-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    10. Huh, Yesol & Kim, You Suk, 2023. "Cheapest-to-deliver pricing, optimal MBS securitization, and welfare implications," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 150(1), pages 68-93.
    11. Mac Clay, Pablo & Börner, Jan & Sellare, Jorge, 2023. "Institutional and macroeconomic stability mediate the effect of auctions on renewable energy capacity," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 180(C).
    12. Yusuke Matsuki, 2016. "A Distribution-Free Test of Monotonicity with an Application to Auctions," Working Papers e110, Tokyo Center for Economic Research.
    13. Laurent Lamy, 2013. "“Upping the ante”: how to design efficient auctions with entry?," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 44(2), pages 194-214, June.
    14. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    15. Amadou Boly & Robert Gillanders & Topi Miettinen, 2016. "Deterrence, peer effect, and legitimacy in anti-corruption policy-making: An experimental analysis," WIDER Working Paper Series 137, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    16. Jeremy Bulow & Jonathan Levin & Paul Milgrom, 2009. "Winning Play in Spectrum Auctions," NBER Working Papers 14765, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    17. Brunner, Christoph & Hu, Audrey & Oechssler, Jörg, 2014. "Premium auctions and risk preferences: An experimental study," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 467-484.
    18. Frank Kelly & Peter Key & Neil Walton, 2016. "Efficient Advert Assignment," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(4), pages 822-837, August.
    19. Sylvain Mignot & Stéphanie Saba & Annick Vignes, 2016. "To trust or to bid: an empirical analysis of social relationships on a fish market," Working Papers halshs-01298872, HAL.
    20. Lamprirni Zarpala & Dimitris Voliotis, 2022. "A core-selecting auction for portfolio's packages," Papers 2206.11516, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2024.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Clearinghouse; Derivatives; futures and options; Central counterparties; CCPs; Bidder selection; Auction theory; Default auctions;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G33 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Bankruptcy; Liquidation
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • G32 - Financial Economics - - Corporate Finance and Governance - - - Financing Policy; Financial Risk and Risk Management; Capital and Ownership Structure; Value of Firms; Goodwill
    • D44 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Auctions
    • G29 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Other

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:fip:fedgfe:2023-33. 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: Ryan Wolfslayer ; Keisha Fournillier (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/frbgvus.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.