Dealers and changing obligations: the case of stub quoting
We examine the liquidity providing behavior of NASDAQ market makers surrounding two periods of changing dealer obligation. The first change in November, 2007 is the relaxation of rule 4613, which required NASDAQ market makers to place two-sided quotes “reasonably related” to the current best bid and...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Review of quantitative finance and accounting 2016-11, Vol.47 (4), p.919-941 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 941 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 4 |
| container_start_page | 919 |
| container_title | Review of quantitative finance and accounting |
| container_volume | 47 |
| creator | Egginton, Jared F. Van Ness, Bonnie F. Van Ness, Robert A. |
| description | We examine the liquidity providing behavior of NASDAQ market makers surrounding two periods of changing dealer obligation. The first change in November, 2007 is the relaxation of rule 4613, which required NASDAQ market makers to place two-sided quotes “reasonably related” to the current best bid and offer. The relaxation of this rule permitted NASDAQ market makers to post quotes far away from the prevailing market, a practice frequently referred to as stub quoting. The second is the Securities and Exchange Commission ban on stub quoting in December, 2010, which requires market makers to quote within a predefined distance from market prices. We find evidence that placing restrictions on stub quoting alters market makers’ liquidity providing behavior in both the 2007 and 2010 rule change periods. Stub quoting restrictions increase the time that market makers quote at the NBBO. We also find evidence that the proportion daily volume executed by market makers increases during the 2007 stub quoting restriction. We also find evidence that restrictions on stub quoting narrows spreads and reduces the price impact of trades. However, we find little evidence that stub quoting rules impact the participation of market makers during days with excessive volatility. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1878795775</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>4203827511</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c413t-8ad4595e2e4c796edc63f1120898db203b3ff1b3cf4923dd270d3a855eb512c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kDtPwzAURi0EEuXxA9gisbAYfO3c2OmGylOqxNKBzXIcJ02Vxq2dDPx7XJUBITHd5ZxPV4eQG2D3wJh8iACABWWAlCFHCidkBigFlSDLUzJjJc-pKvDznFzEuGEsWYgzMn9ypnchZmaoM7s2Q9sNbearvmvN2PkhzrNx7TJrost8k8VxqrL95MdEXZGzxvTRXf_cS7J6eV4t3ujy4_V98bikNgcxUmXqHEt03OVWloWrbSEaAM5UqeqKM1GJpoFK2CYvuahrLlktjEJ0FQK34pLcHWd3we8nF0e97aJ1fW8G56eoQUklS5QSE3r7B934KQzpuURxVJDzgiUKjpQNPsbgGr0L3daELw1MH2LqY0ydYupDTA3J4UcnJnZoXfi1_K_0DTk7dVw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1825814260</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Dealers and changing obligations: the case of stub quoting</title><source>SpringerLink Journals</source><source>Business Source Complete</source><creator>Egginton, Jared F. ; Van Ness, Bonnie F. ; Van Ness, Robert A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Egginton, Jared F. ; Van Ness, Bonnie F. ; Van Ness, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><description>We examine the liquidity providing behavior of NASDAQ market makers surrounding two periods of changing dealer obligation. The first change in November, 2007 is the relaxation of rule 4613, which required NASDAQ market makers to place two-sided quotes “reasonably related” to the current best bid and offer. The relaxation of this rule permitted NASDAQ market makers to post quotes far away from the prevailing market, a practice frequently referred to as stub quoting. The second is the Securities and Exchange Commission ban on stub quoting in December, 2010, which requires market makers to quote within a predefined distance from market prices. We find evidence that placing restrictions on stub quoting alters market makers’ liquidity providing behavior in both the 2007 and 2010 rule change periods. Stub quoting restrictions increase the time that market makers quote at the NBBO. We also find evidence that the proportion daily volume executed by market makers increases during the 2007 stub quoting restriction. We also find evidence that restrictions on stub quoting narrows spreads and reduces the price impact of trades. However, we find little evidence that stub quoting rules impact the participation of market makers during days with excessive volatility.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0924-865X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7179</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Accounting/Auditing ; Bans ; Corporate Finance ; Econometrics ; Economics and Finance ; Finance ; Liquidity ; NASDAQ trading ; Operations Research/Decision Theory ; Original Research ; Pilot projects ; Price quotations ; Restrictions ; SEC regulations ; Securities industry ; Spread ; Stock prices ; Stocks ; Studies ; United States ; Volatility</subject><ispartof>Review of quantitative finance and accounting, 2016-11, Vol.47 (4), p.919-941</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015</rights><rights>Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c413t-8ad4595e2e4c796edc63f1120898db203b3ff1b3cf4923dd270d3a855eb512c3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c413t-8ad4595e2e4c796edc63f1120898db203b3ff1b3cf4923dd270d3a855eb512c3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1$$EPDF$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1$$EHTML$$P50$$Gspringer$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,27901,27902,41464,42533,51294</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Egginton, Jared F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Ness, Bonnie F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Ness, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><title>Dealers and changing obligations: the case of stub quoting</title><title>Review of quantitative finance and accounting</title><addtitle>Rev Quant Finan Acc</addtitle><description>We examine the liquidity providing behavior of NASDAQ market makers surrounding two periods of changing dealer obligation. The first change in November, 2007 is the relaxation of rule 4613, which required NASDAQ market makers to place two-sided quotes “reasonably related” to the current best bid and offer. The relaxation of this rule permitted NASDAQ market makers to post quotes far away from the prevailing market, a practice frequently referred to as stub quoting. The second is the Securities and Exchange Commission ban on stub quoting in December, 2010, which requires market makers to quote within a predefined distance from market prices. We find evidence that placing restrictions on stub quoting alters market makers’ liquidity providing behavior in both the 2007 and 2010 rule change periods. Stub quoting restrictions increase the time that market makers quote at the NBBO. We also find evidence that the proportion daily volume executed by market makers increases during the 2007 stub quoting restriction. We also find evidence that restrictions on stub quoting narrows spreads and reduces the price impact of trades. However, we find little evidence that stub quoting rules impact the participation of market makers during days with excessive volatility.</description><subject>Accounting/Auditing</subject><subject>Bans</subject><subject>Corporate Finance</subject><subject>Econometrics</subject><subject>Economics and Finance</subject><subject>Finance</subject><subject>Liquidity</subject><subject>NASDAQ trading</subject><subject>Operations Research/Decision Theory</subject><subject>Original Research</subject><subject>Pilot projects</subject><subject>Price quotations</subject><subject>Restrictions</subject><subject>SEC regulations</subject><subject>Securities industry</subject><subject>Spread</subject><subject>Stock prices</subject><subject>Stocks</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>United States</subject><subject>Volatility</subject><issn>0924-865X</issn><issn>1573-7179</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2016</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kDtPwzAURi0EEuXxA9gisbAYfO3c2OmGylOqxNKBzXIcJ02Vxq2dDPx7XJUBITHd5ZxPV4eQG2D3wJh8iACABWWAlCFHCidkBigFlSDLUzJjJc-pKvDznFzEuGEsWYgzMn9ypnchZmaoM7s2Q9sNbearvmvN2PkhzrNx7TJrost8k8VxqrL95MdEXZGzxvTRXf_cS7J6eV4t3ujy4_V98bikNgcxUmXqHEt03OVWloWrbSEaAM5UqeqKM1GJpoFK2CYvuahrLlktjEJ0FQK34pLcHWd3we8nF0e97aJ1fW8G56eoQUklS5QSE3r7B934KQzpuURxVJDzgiUKjpQNPsbgGr0L3daELw1MH2LqY0ydYupDTA3J4UcnJnZoXfi1_K_0DTk7dVw</recordid><startdate>20161101</startdate><enddate>20161101</enddate><creator>Egginton, Jared F.</creator><creator>Van Ness, Bonnie F.</creator><creator>Van Ness, Robert A.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0U~</scope><scope>1-H</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7X1</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>885</scope><scope>8A9</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ANIOZ</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRAZJ</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>L.0</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>M1F</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20161101</creationdate><title>Dealers and changing obligations: the case of stub quoting</title><author>Egginton, Jared F. ; Van Ness, Bonnie F. ; Van Ness, Robert A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c413t-8ad4595e2e4c796edc63f1120898db203b3ff1b3cf4923dd270d3a855eb512c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2016</creationdate><topic>Accounting/Auditing</topic><topic>Bans</topic><topic>Corporate Finance</topic><topic>Econometrics</topic><topic>Economics and Finance</topic><topic>Finance</topic><topic>Liquidity</topic><topic>NASDAQ trading</topic><topic>Operations Research/Decision Theory</topic><topic>Original Research</topic><topic>Pilot projects</topic><topic>Price quotations</topic><topic>Restrictions</topic><topic>SEC regulations</topic><topic>Securities industry</topic><topic>Spread</topic><topic>Stock prices</topic><topic>Stocks</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>United States</topic><topic>Volatility</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Egginton, Jared F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Ness, Bonnie F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Van Ness, Robert A.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Global News & ABI/Inform Professional</collection><collection>Trade PRO</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>Accounting & Tax Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Banking Information Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Accounting & Tax Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Accounting, Tax & Banking Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Accounting, Tax & Banking Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Standard</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global</collection><collection>Banking Information Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Review of quantitative finance and accounting</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Egginton, Jared F.</au><au>Van Ness, Bonnie F.</au><au>Van Ness, Robert A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Dealers and changing obligations: the case of stub quoting</atitle><jtitle>Review of quantitative finance and accounting</jtitle><stitle>Rev Quant Finan Acc</stitle><date>2016-11-01</date><risdate>2016</risdate><volume>47</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>919</spage><epage>941</epage><pages>919-941</pages><issn>0924-865X</issn><eissn>1573-7179</eissn><abstract>We examine the liquidity providing behavior of NASDAQ market makers surrounding two periods of changing dealer obligation. The first change in November, 2007 is the relaxation of rule 4613, which required NASDAQ market makers to place two-sided quotes “reasonably related” to the current best bid and offer. The relaxation of this rule permitted NASDAQ market makers to post quotes far away from the prevailing market, a practice frequently referred to as stub quoting. The second is the Securities and Exchange Commission ban on stub quoting in December, 2010, which requires market makers to quote within a predefined distance from market prices. We find evidence that placing restrictions on stub quoting alters market makers’ liquidity providing behavior in both the 2007 and 2010 rule change periods. Stub quoting restrictions increase the time that market makers quote at the NBBO. We also find evidence that the proportion daily volume executed by market makers increases during the 2007 stub quoting restriction. We also find evidence that restrictions on stub quoting narrows spreads and reduces the price impact of trades. However, we find little evidence that stub quoting rules impact the participation of market makers during days with excessive volatility.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><doi>10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1</doi><tpages>23</tpages></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0924-865X |
| ispartof | Review of quantitative finance and accounting, 2016-11, Vol.47 (4), p.919-941 |
| issn | 0924-865X 1573-7179 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1878795775 |
| source | SpringerLink Journals; Business Source Complete |
| subjects | Accounting/Auditing Bans Corporate Finance Econometrics Economics and Finance Finance Liquidity NASDAQ trading Operations Research/Decision Theory Original Research Pilot projects Price quotations Restrictions SEC regulations Securities industry Spread Stock prices Stocks Studies United States Volatility |
| title | Dealers and changing obligations: the case of stub quoting |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-02T02%3A33%3A24IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Dealers%20and%20changing%20obligations:%20the%20case%20of%20stub%20quoting&rft.jtitle=Review%20of%20quantitative%20finance%20and%20accounting&rft.au=Egginton,%20Jared%20F.&rft.date=2016-11-01&rft.volume=47&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=919&rft.epage=941&rft.pages=919-941&rft.issn=0924-865X&rft.eissn=1573-7179&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s11156-015-0525-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E4203827511%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1825814260&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true |