IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wpa/wuwpfi/9905003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Futures Exchange Innovations: Reinforcement versus Cannibalism

Author

Listed:
  • Joost M.E. Pennings

    (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

  • Raymond M. Leuthold

    (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign)

Abstract

Futures exchanges are in constant search of futures contracts that will generate a profitable level of trading volume. In this context, it would be interesting to determine what effect the introduction of new futures contracts have on the trading volume of the contracts already listed. The introduction of new futures contracts may lead to a volume increase for those contracts already listed and hence, contribute to the success of a futures exchange. On the other hand, the introduction of new futures contracts could lead to a volume decrease for the contracts already listed, thereby undermining the success of the futures exchange accordingly. Using a multi-product hedging model in which the perspective has been shifted from portfolio to exchange management, we study these effects. Using data from two exchanges that are different regarding market liquidity (Amsterdam Exchanges versus Chicago Board of Trade) we show the usefulness of the proposed tool. Our findings have several important implications for a futures exchange's innovation policy.

Suggested Citation

  • Joost M.E. Pennings & Raymond M. Leuthold, 1999. "Futures Exchange Innovations: Reinforcement versus Cannibalism," Finance 9905003, EconWPA.
  • Handle: RePEc:wpa:wuwpfi:9905003
    Note: Type of Document - PDF; prepared on IBM PC ; pages: 34 ; figures: included. Office for Futures and Options Research (OFOR) at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Working Paper 99-03. For a complete list of OFOR working papers see http://w3.ag.uiuc.edu/ACE/ofor
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de/econ-wp/fin/papers/9905/9905003.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gemmill, Gordon, 1994. "Margins and the safety of clearing houses," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(5), pages 979-996, October.
    2. Meyer, Jack & Rasche, Robert H, 1992. "Sufficient Conditions for Expected Utility to Imply Mean-Standard Deviation Rankings: Empirical Evidence Concerning the Location and Scale Condition," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 102(410), pages 91-106, January.
    3. Cuny, Charles J, 1993. "The Role of Liquidity in Futures Market Innovations," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 6(1), pages 57-78.
    4. Anderson, Ronald W & Danthine, Jean-Pierre, 1980. " Hedging and Joint Production: Theory and Illustrations," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 35(2), pages 487-498, May.
    5. Merton, Robert C., 1995. "Financial innovation and the management and regulation of financial institutions," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(3-4), pages 461-481, June.
    6. Kilcollin, T. Eric & Frankel, Michael E. S., 1993. "Futures and options markets: Their new role in Eastern Europe," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 17(5), pages 869-881, September.
    7. Tashjian Elizabeth & Weissman Maayana, 1995. "Advantages to Competing with Yourself: Why an Exchange Might Design Futures Contracts with Correlated Payoffs," Journal of Financial Intermediation, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 133-157, April.
    8. Ederington, Louis H, 1979. "The Hedging Performance of the New Futures Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 34(1), pages 157-170, March.
    9. Rolfo, Jacques, 1980. "Optimal Hedging under Price and Quantity Uncertainty: The Case of a Cocoa Producer," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 88(1), pages 100-116, February.
    10. Chang, Carolyn W & Chang, Jack S K & Fang, Hsing, 1996. "Optimal Futures Hedge with Marketing-to-Market and Stochastic Interest Rates," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 309-326, Fall.
    11. Anderson, Ronald W & Danthine, Jean-Pierre, 1981. "Cross Hedging," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 89(6), pages 1182-1196, December.
    12. Pulley, Lawrence B., 1981. "A General Mean-Variance Approximation to Expected Utility for Short Holding Periods," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(03), pages 361-373, September.
    13. Harvey Lapan & Giancarlo Moschini, 1994. "Futures Hedging Under Price, Basis, and Production Risk," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 76(3), pages 465-477.
    14. Mark Britten-Jones, 1999. "The Sampling Error in Estimates of Mean-Variance Efficient Portfolio Weights," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(2), pages 655-671, April.
    15. Bigelow, John Payne, 1993. "Consistency of mean-variance analysis and expected utility analysis : A complete characterization," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 43(2), pages 187-192.
    16. Robert Ferguson & Dean Leistikow, 1998. "Are regression approach futures hedge ratios stationary?," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(7), pages 851-866, October.
    17. Goldberg, Lawrence G. & Hachey, George Jr., 1992. "Price volatility and margin requirements in foreign exchange futures markets," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 328-339, August.
    18. Johnston, Elizabeth Tashjian & McConnell, John J, 1989. "Requiem for a Market: An Analysis of the Rise and Fall of a Financial Futures Contract," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 2(1), pages 1-23.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G - Financial Economics

    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:wpa:wuwpfi:9905003. 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: (EconWPA). General contact details of provider: https://econwpa.ub.uni-muenchen.de .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.