IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nys/sunysb/14-06.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Over-the-Counter Markets vs Double Auctions: A Comparative Experimental Study

Author

Listed:
  • Giuseppe Attanasi
  • Samuele Centorrino
  • Ivan Moscati

Abstract

We study an electronic over-the-counter (OTC) market, in which each agent looks for the best counterpart through bilateral negotiations. We compare its performance with the standard electronic double-auction (DA) market, in which traders post their quotes publicly. We show that the lack of information in the OTC market induces an efficiency loss, characterized by an average closing price below the competitive price and by a traded quantity below the competitive quantity. We further test the robustness of these findings when exogenous shocks modify the competitive equilibrium. Among other things, we show that supply shocks increasing the competitive quantity improve OTC's efficiency.

Suggested Citation

  • Giuseppe Attanasi & Samuele Centorrino & Ivan Moscati, 2014. "Over-the-Counter Markets vs Double Auctions: A Comparative Experimental Study," Department of Economics Working Papers 14-06, Stony Brook University, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:nys:sunysb:14-06
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sunysb.edu/economics/research/papers/2014/Attanasi_Centorrino_Moscati_OTC-Oct2014_NEW.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:feb:artefa:0102 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Duffie, Darrell & Malamud, Semyon & Manso, Gustavo, 2014. "Information percolation in segmented markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1-32.
    3. John List, 2002. "Testing neoclassical competitive market theory in the field," Artefactual Field Experiments 00082, The Field Experiments Website.
    4. repec:feb:framed:0081 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Camerer, Colin F & Hogarth, Robin M, 1999. "The Effects of Financial Incentives in Experiments: A Review and Capital-Labor-Production Framework," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 19(1-3), pages 7-42, December.
    6. Nicholas Bardsley & Robin Cubitt & Graham Loomes & Peter Moffatt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2009. "Experimental Economics: Rethinking the Rules," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9074.
    7. Darrell Duffie & Gaston Giroux & Gustavo Manso, 2010. "Information Percolation," American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, American Economic Association, vol. 2(1), pages 100-111, February.
    8. John Rust & George Hall, 2003. "Middlemen versus Market Makers: A Theory of Competitive Exchange," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(2), pages 353-403, April.
    9. Darrell Duffie, 2012. "Over-The-Counter Markets," Introductory Chapters, in: Dark Markets: Asset Pricing and Information Transmission in Over-the-Counter Markets, Princeton University Press.
    10. Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), 2008. "Handbook of Experimental Economics Results," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 4, March.
    11. Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), 2008. "Handbook of Experimental Economics Results," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 2, March.
    12. Ospina, Raydonal & Ferrari, Silvia L.P., 2012. "A general class of zero-or-one inflated beta regression models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(6), pages 1609-1623.
    13. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    14. Darrell Duffie & Semyon Malamud & Gustavo Manso, 2009. "Information Percolation With Equilibrium Search Dynamics," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 77(5), pages 1513-1574, September.
    15. Gode, Dhananjay K & Sunder, Shyam, 1993. "Allocative Efficiency of Markets with Zero-Intelligence Traders: Market as a Partial Substitute for Individual Rationality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(1), pages 119-137, February.
    16. Vernon L. Smith, 1962. "An Experimental Study of Competitive Market Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(2), pages 111-111.
    17. Charles A. Holt, 1999. "Teaching Economics with Classroom Experiments: A Symposium," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(3), pages 603-610, January.
    18. John A. List, 2004. "Testing Neoclassical Competitive Theory in Multilateral Decentralized Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(5), pages 1131-1156, October.
    19. Charles A. Holt, 1996. "Classroom Games: Trading in a Pit Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 10(1), pages 193-203, Winter.
    20. Darrell Duffie, 2010. "Presidential Address: Asset Price Dynamics with Slow‐Moving Capital," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 65(4), pages 1237-1267, August.
    21. Giuseppe Attanasi & Samuele Centorrino & Ivan Moscati, 2016. "An Experimental Study of an Over-the-Counter Market," Post-Print hal-01721851, HAL.
    22. Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), 2008. "Handbook of Experimental Economics Results," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 6, March.
    23. Darrell Duffie & Nicolae Gârleanu & Lasse Heje Pedersen, 2007. "Valuation in Over-the-Counter Markets," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 20(6), pages 1865-1900, November.
    24. Adam B. Ashcraft & Darrell Duffie, 2007. "Systemic Illiquidity in the Federal Funds Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 221-225, May.
    25. Duffie, Darrell & Malamud, Semyon & Manso, Gustavo, 2010. "The relative contributions of private information sharing and public information releases to information aggregation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 145(4), pages 1574-1601, July.
    26. Plott, Charles R., 2008. "Properties of Disequilibrium Adjustment in Double Auction Markets," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 1, pages 16-21, Elsevier.
    27. John List, 2002. "Testing neoclassical competitive market theory in the field: Some pilot results," Framed Field Experiments 00172, The Field Experiments Website.
    28. Blundell, Richard & Bond, Stephen, 1998. "Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 87(1), pages 115-143, August.
    29. Andrew Ang & Assaf A. Shtauber & Paul C. Tetlock, 2013. "Asset Pricing in the Dark: The Cross-Section of OTC Stocks," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 26(12), pages 2985-3028.
    30. Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), 2008. "Handbook of Experimental Economics Results," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 7, March.
    31. Davis, Douglas D. & Harrison, Glenn W. & Williams, Arlington W., 1993. "Convergence to nonstationary competitive equilibria : An experimental analysis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 22(3), pages 305-326, December.
    32. Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), 2008. "Handbook of Experimental Economics Results," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 1, March.
    33. Darrell Duffie & Gustavo Manso, 2007. "Information Percolation in Large Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 203-209, May.
    34. Terrence Hendershott & Ananth Madhavan, 2015. "Click or Call? Auction versus Search in the Over-the-Counter Market," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 70(1), pages 419-447, February.
    35. Cason, Timothy N. & Friedman, Daniel, 1996. "Price formation in double auction markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(8), pages 1307-1337, August.
    36. Cason, Timothy N. & Friedman, Daniel, 2008. "A Comparison of Market Institutions," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, in: Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 33, pages 264-272, Elsevier.
    37. Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), 2008. "Handbook of Experimental Economics Results," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 3, March.
    38. Guala,Francesco, 2005. "The Methodology of Experimental Economics," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521618618, June.
    39. Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), 2008. "Handbook of Experimental Economics Results," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 8, March.
    40. Charles R. Plott & Vernon L. Smith (ed.), 2008. "Handbook of Experimental Economics Results," Handbook of Experimental Economics Results, Elsevier, edition 1, volume 1, number 5, March.
    41. Charles A. Holt, 1999. "Teaching Economics with Classroom Experiments: A Symposium," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 65(3), pages 603-610, January.
    42. Darrell Duffie, 2012. "Dark Markets: Asset Pricing and Information Transmission in Over-the-Counter Markets," Economics Books, Princeton University Press, edition 1, number 9623.
    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. Giuseppe Attanasi & Kene Boun My & Andrea Guido & Mathieu Lefevbre, 2019. "Controlling Monopoly Power in a Classroom Double-Auction Market Experiment," Working Papers of BETA 2019-08, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    2. Lange, Andreas & Ross, Johannes, 2024. "Internalizing match-dependent externalities," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 356-378.
    3. Rocco Caferra & Gabriele Tedeschi & Andrea Morone, 2023. "Agents interaction and price dynamics: evidence from the laboratory," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 18(2), pages 251-274, April.
    4. Neugebauer, Tibor & Shachat, Jason & Szymczak, Wiebke, 2023. "A test of the Modigliani-Miller theorem, dividend policy and algorithmic arbitrage in experimental asset markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    5. Giuseppe Attanasi & Kene Boun My & Andrea Guido & Mathieu Lefebvre, 2021. "Controlling monopoly power in a double‐auction market experiment," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(5), pages 1074-1101, October.
    6. Weber, Matthias & Duffy, John & Schram, Arthur, 2024. "Regulation and the demand for credit default swaps in experimental bond markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    7. Alfarano, Simone & Banal-Estanol, Albert & Camacho-Cuena, Eva & Iori, Giulia & Kapar, Burcu, 2020. "Centralized vs decentralized markets in the laboratory: The role of connectivity," MPRA Paper 99129, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Rohit Rahi & Burcu Kapar & Giulia Iori & Eva Camacho & Simone Alfarano & Albert Banal-Estañol, 2024. "Centralized vs Decentralized Markets: The Role of Connectivity," Working Papers 1420, Barcelona School of Economics.
    9. Ding, Shuze & Lu, Dong & Puzzello, Daniela, 2025. "The impact of search frictions in experimental asset markets: Over-the-counter versus double auction," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 229(C).
    10. Lu, Dong & Zhan, Yaosong, 2022. "Over-the-counter versus double auction in asset markets with near-zero-intelligence traders," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).

    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. Giuseppe Attanasi & Samuele Centorrino & Elena Manzoni, 2020. "Zero-Intelligence vs. Human Agents: An Experimental Analysis of the Efficiency of Double Auctions and Over-the-Counter Markets of Varying Sizes," Working Papers 05/2020, University of Verona, Department of Economics.
    2. Giuseppe Attanasi & Samuele Centorrino & Elena Manzoni, 2021. "Zero‐intelligence versus human agents: An experimental analysis of the efficiency of Double Auctions and Over‐the‐Counter markets of varying sizes," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(5), pages 895-932, October.
    3. Eric M. Aldrich & Kristian López Vargas, 2020. "Experiments in high-frequency trading: comparing two market institutions," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 322-352, June.
    4. Sean Crockett, 2013. "Price Dynamics In General Equilibrium Experiments," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 27(3), pages 421-438, July.
    5. Nicholas, Aaron, 2022. "Invisible Hand, invisible morals: An experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 197(C), pages 395-418.
    6. Christophe Bisière & Jean-Paul Décamps & Stefano Lovo, 2015. "Risk Attitude, Beliefs Updating, and the Information Content of Trades: An Experiment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(6), pages 1378-1397, June.
    7. Hennig-Schmidt, Heike & Selten, Reinhard & Wiesen, Daniel, 2011. "How payment systems affect physicians' provision behaviour--An experimental investigation," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 637-646, July.
    8. Giovanni Di Bartolomeo & Stefano Papa, 2019. "The Effects of Physical Activity on Social Interactions: The Case of Trust and Trustworthiness," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 20(1), pages 50-71, January.
    9. Teemu Pennanen, 2020. "Efficient allocations in double auction markets," Papers 2001.02071, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2021.
    10. Bulent Guler & Volodymyr Lugovskyy & Daniela Puzzello & Steven Tucker, 2021. "Trading Institutions in Experimental Asset Markets: Theory and Evidence," Working Papers in Economics 21/15, University of Waikato.
    11. Justyna Brzezicka & Radosław Wisniewski, 2014. "Homo Oeconomicus and Behavioral Economics," Contemporary Economics, University of Economics and Human Sciences in Warsaw., vol. 8(4), December.
    12. Dave Cliff, 2021. "BBE: Simulating the Microstructural Dynamics of an In-Play Betting Exchange via Agent-Based Modelling," Papers 2105.08310, arXiv.org.
    13. Marc Oliver Rieger & Mei Wang & Thorsten Hens, 2015. "Risk Preferences Around the World," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(3), pages 637-648, March.
    14. Paul Brewer & Anmol Ratan, 2017. "Double Auction Market Trading and Income Inequality: An initial investigation," Monash Economics Working Papers 12-17, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    15. Tobias Salz & Emanuel Vespa, 2020. "Estimating dynamic games of oligopolistic competition: an experimental investigation," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 51(2), pages 447-469, June.
    16. Ambrus, Attila & Pathak, Parag A., 2011. "Cooperation over finite horizons: A theory and experiments," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(7), pages 500-512.
    17. Blair Cleave & Nikos Nikiforakis & Robert Slonim, 2013. "Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? The case of social and risk preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 372-382, September.
    18. Pierre-Olivier Pineau, 2022. "Choosing to Pay More for Electricity: an experiment on the level of residential consumer cooperation," CIRANO Working Papers 2022s-18, CIRANO.
    19. Ciril Bosch-Rosa & Thomas Meissner & Antoni Bosch-Domènech, 2018. "Cognitive bubbles," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 132-153, March.
    20. James C. Cox & Vjollca Sadiraj, 2018. "Incentives," Experimental Economics Center Working Paper Series 2018-01, Experimental Economics Center, Andrew Young School of Policy Studies, Georgia State University.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D41 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Perfect Competition
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design

    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:nys:sunysb:14-06. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/edstous.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.