IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does algorithmic trading improve liquidity?


  • Hendershott, Terrence
  • Jones, Charles M.
  • Menkveld, Albert J.


Algorithmic trading has sharply increased over the past decade. Equity market liquidity has improved as well. Are the two trends related? For a recent five-year panel of New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) stocks, we use a normalized measure of electronic message traffic (order submissions, cancellations, and executions) as a proxy for algorithmic trading, and we trace the associations between liquidity and message traffic. Based on within-stock variation, we find that algorithmic trading and liquidity are positively related. To sort out causality, we use the start of autoquoting on the NYSE as an exogenous instrument for algorithmic trading. Previously, specialists were responsible for manually disseminating the inside quote. As stocks were phased in gradually during early 2003, the manual quote was replaced by a new automated quote whenever there was a change to the NYSE limit order book. This market structure change provides quicker feedback to traders and algorithms and results in more message traffic. For large-cap stocks in particular, quoted and effective spreads narrow under autoquote and adverse selection declines, indicating that algorithmic trading does causally improve liquidity.

Suggested Citation

  • Hendershott, Terrence & Jones, Charles M. & Menkveld, Albert J., 2008. "Does algorithmic trading improve liquidity?," CFS Working Paper Series 2008/41, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:cfswop:200841

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Keim, Donald B. & Madhavan, Ananth, 1995. "Anatomy of the trading process Empirical evidence on the behavior of institutional traders," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 37(3), pages 371-398, March.
    2. Thierry Foucault & Ailsa Röell & Patrik Sandås, 2003. "Market Making with Costly Monitoring: An Analysis of the SOES Controversy," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 16(2), pages 345-384.
    3. Glosten, Lawrence R, 1994. " Is the Electronic Open Limit Order Book Inevitable?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(4), pages 1127-1161, September.
    4. Lee, Charles M C & Ready, Mark J, 1991. " Inferring Trade Direction from Intraday Data," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(2), pages 733-746, June.
    5. Ranaldo, Angelo, 2004. "Order aggressiveness in limit order book markets," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 7(1), pages 53-74, January.
    6. Obizhaeva, Anna A. & Wang, Jiang, 2013. "Optimal trading strategy and supply/demand dynamics," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 1-32.
    7. Bessembinder, Hendrik, 2003. "Issues in assessing trade execution costs," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 6(3), pages 233-257, May.
    8. Hasbrouck, Joel & Ho, Thomas S Y, 1987. " Order Arrival, Quote Behavior, and the Return-Generating Process," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 42(4), pages 1035-1048, September.
    9. Lo, Andrew W. & MacKinlay, A. Craig & Zhang, June, 2002. "Econometric models of limit-order executions," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(1), pages 31-71, July.
    10. Ekkehart Boehmer & Gideon Saar & Lei Yu, 2005. "Lifting the Veil: An Analysis of Pre-trade Transparency at the NYSE," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(2), pages 783-815, April.
    11. Pankaj K. Jain, 2005. "Financial Market Design and the Equity Premium: Electronic versus Floor Trading," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(6), pages 2955-2985, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Liquidity; Algorithmic Trading; Microstructure;

    JEL classification:

    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)


    Access and download statistics


    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:zbw:cfswop:200841. 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: (ZBW - German National Library of Economics). General contact details of provider: .

    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.