IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/net/wpaper/0835.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Market Dominance and Barriers to Competition in Financial Trading Venues

Author

Abstract

The Market in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) aims to increase competition and to foster client protection in the European financial market. Among other provisions, it abolishes the concentration rule and challenges the market power of existing trading venues. The directive introduces venue competition in order to achieve better execution and ultimately lower trading costs. In this paper I address the question of whether fostering competition between alternative trading venues alone may or not be able to impact actual competition in the market. I consider two reasons for why it may not: direct network effects together with increasing returns to scale, and post-trading constraints. In particular, I (a) evaluate the actual degree of competition between trading venues, (b) measure the impact of network effects on competition, and lastly (c) assess the barriers to competition induced by post-trading constraints. The results imply that financial intermediaries tend to value liquidity more (than total fees) when deciding where to route a given order for execution - implying that being the incumbent venue translates into a competitive advantage. Furthermore, eliminating the mentioned barriers to competition seems to be associated with a significant decrease (of a similar magnitude) in the asymmetry of the industry.

Suggested Citation

  • Ricardo Ribeiro, 2008. "Market Dominance and Barriers to Competition in Financial Trading Venues," Working Papers 08-35, NET Institute, revised Oct 2008.
    • Handle: RePEc:net:wpaper:0835
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.netinst.org/Ribeiro_08-35.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Peter Davis, 2006. "Spatial competition in retail markets: movie theaters," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 37(4), pages 964-982, December.
    2. Hansen, Lars Peter, 1982. "Large Sample Properties of Generalized Method of Moments Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1029-1054, July.
    3. Arellano, Manuel & Bover, Olympia, 1995. "Another look at the instrumental variable estimation of error-components models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 29-51, July.
    4. Marc Rysman, 2007. "An Empirical Analysis Of Payment Card Usage," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 55(1), pages 1-36, March.
    5. Ali Hortaçsu & Chad Syverson, 2004. "Product Differentiation, Search Costs, and Competition in the Mutual Fund Industry: A Case Study of S&P 500 Index Funds," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 119(2), pages 403-456.
    6. McFadden, Daniel, 1989. "A Method of Simulated Moments for Estimation of Discrete Response Models without Numerical Integration," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 995-1026, September.
    7. Wahal, Sunil, 1997. "Entry, Exit, Market Makers, and the Bid-Ask Spread," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 10(3), pages 871-901.
    8. Pakes, Ariel & Pollard, David, 1989. "Simulation and the Asymptotics of Optimization Estimators," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(5), pages 1027-1057, September.
    9. Peter Davis, 2006. "Spatial competition in retail markets: movie theaters," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 37(4), pages 964-982, December.
    10. Pakes, Ariel S, 1986. "Patents as Options: Some Estimates of the Value of Holding European Patent Stocks," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(4), pages 755-784, July.
    11. Jiawei Chen & Ulrich Doraszelski & Joseph E. Harrington, Jr., 2009. "Avoiding market dominance: product compatibility in markets with network effects," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 40(3), pages 455-485, September.
    12. Hamilton, James L, 1979. "Marketplace Fragmentation, Competition, and the Efficiency of the Stock Exchange," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 34(1), pages 171-187, March.
    13. Austan Goolsbee & Amil Petrin, 2004. "The Consumer Gains from Direct Broadcast Satellites and the Competition with Cable TV," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(2), pages 351-381, March.
    14. James Weston, 2002. "Electronic Communication Networks and Liquidity on the Nasdaq," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 22(1), pages 125-139, August.
    15. Marco Pagano, 1989. "Trading Volume and Asset Liquidity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(2), pages 255-274.
    16. Berry, Steven & Levinsohn, James & Pakes, Ariel, 1995. "Automobile Prices in Market Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 63(4), pages 841-890, July.
    17. Dubois, Pierre & Hernandez-Perez, Adriana & Ivaldi, Marc, 2006. "The Market of Academic Journals: Empirical Evidence from Data on French Libraries," IDEI Working Papers 416, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
    18. Ivaldi, Marc & Dubois, Pierre & Hernandez-Perez, Adriana, 2006. "Academic Journals as Two-Sided Platforms: Empirical Evidence from Data on French Libraries," CEPR Discussion Papers 5990, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    19. Brown, Bryan W & Walker, Mary Beth, 1989. "The Random Utility Hypothesis and Inference in Demand Systems," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(4), pages 815-829, July.
    20. Cantillon, Estelle & Yin, Pai-Ling, 2007. "How and when do markets tip? Lessons from the Battle of the Bund," Working Paper Series 766, European Central Bank.
    21. Manuel Arellano & Stephen Bond, 1991. "Some Tests of Specification for Panel Data: Monte Carlo Evidence and an Application to Employment Equations," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 58(2), pages 277-297.
    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. Gomber, Peter & Jäger, Benedikt, 2014. "MiFID: Eine systematische Analyse der Zielerreichung," SAFE White Paper Series 14, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.

    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. Steven Berry & James Levinsohn & Ariel Pakes, 2004. "Differentiated Products Demand Systems from a Combination of Micro and Macro Data: The New Car Market," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(1), pages 68-105, February.
    2. Peter Davis & Pasquale Schiraldi, 2014. "The flexible coefficient multinomial logit (FC-MNL) model of demand for differentiated products," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(1), pages 32-63, March.
    3. Victor Aguirregabiria & Margaret Slade, 2017. "Empirical models of firms and industries," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 50(5), pages 1445-1488, December.
    4. Robin S. Lee, 2013. "Vertical Integration and Exclusivity in Platform and Two-Sided Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 103(7), pages 2960-3000, December.
    5. davis, peter, 2006. "The Discrete Choice Analytically Flexible (DCAF) Model of Demand for Differentiated Products," CEPR Discussion Papers 5880, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Igal Hendel, 1994. "Estimating Multiple-Discrete Choice Models: An Application to Computeri-zzation Returns," NBER Technical Working Papers 0168, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Yi Deng, 2003. "A Dynamic Stochastic Analysis of International Patent Application and Renewal Processes," Computing in Economics and Finance 2003 189, Society for Computational Economics.
    8. Nathan H. Miller & Matthew Osborne, 2014. "Spatial differentiation and price discrimination in the cement industry: evidence from a structural model," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 45(2), pages 221-247, June.
    9. Nicholas Economides & Przemyslaw Jeziorski, 2017. "Mobile Money in Tanzania," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 815-837, November.
    10. Jean-Jacques Forneron, 2019. "A Sieve-SMM Estimator for Dynamic Models," Papers 1902.01456, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2023.
    11. Daniel Ackerberg, 2009. "A new use of importance sampling to reduce computational burden in simulation estimation," Quantitative Marketing and Economics (QME), Springer, vol. 7(4), pages 343-376, December.
    12. Jeremy T. Fox, 2018. "Estimating matching games with transfers," Quantitative Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 9(1), pages 1-38, March.
    13. Nikolay Archak & Anindya Ghose & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, 2011. "Deriving the Pricing Power of Product Features by Mining Consumer Reviews," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(8), pages 1485-1509, August.
    14. Davis, Peter, 2000. "Empirical models of demand for differentiated products," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 44(4-6), pages 993-1005, May.
    15. Franco Mariuzzo, 2005. "The Efect of Differences in Buyer and Non-Buyer Characteristics on Equilibrium Price-Elasticities: an Empirical Study on the Italian Automobile Market," Trinity Economics Papers tep13, Trinity College Dublin, Department of Economics.
    16. Andrew Ching, 2000. "Dynamic Equilibrium in the US Prescription Drug Market After Patent Expiration," Econometric Society World Congress 2000 Contributed Papers 1242, Econometric Society.
    17. Inkmann, Joachim, 2000. "Misspecified heteroskedasticity in the panel probit model: A small sample comparison of GMM and SML estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 97(2), pages 227-259, August.
    18. Degryse, H.A., 2007. "Competition on financial markets : Does market design matter?," Other publications TiSEM ee5530b2-34f7-4d95-ad62-f, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    19. Ashish Kabra & Elena Belavina & Karan Girotra, 2020. "Bike-Share Systems: Accessibility and Availability," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 3803-3824, September.
    20. Dennis Epple & Thomas Romer & Holger Sieg, 1999. "The Tiebout Hypothesis and Majority Rule: An Empirical Analysis," NBER Working Papers 6977, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Market Dominance; Network Effects; Financial Trading; Demand; Barriers to Competition;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
    • L11 - Industrial Organization - - Market Structure, Firm Strategy, and Market Performance - - - Production, Pricing, and Market Structure; Size Distribution of Firms
    • L84 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Personal, Professional, and Business Services

    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:net:wpaper:0835. 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: Nicholas Economides (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.NETinst.org/ .

    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.