Endogenous Illiquidity Trading Costs from Risk Sharing

S. Galy
{"title":"Endogenous Illiquidity Trading Costs from Risk Sharing","authors":"S. Galy","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.364861","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In general, index and commodity futures markets are considered to be highly liquid. Yet these markets can quickly become illiquid in periods of high uncertainty. So far, there exists no theoretical explanation as to why liquid futures markets can become illiquid in these periods of high uncertainty. This paper shows how illiquidity creates theoretically an endogenous transaction cost increasing with the variance of the spot price and the volume of trades in the futures market generated by hedging pressures. High uncertainty represented by high volatility in the spot market drives out liquidity in the futures market the larger the trades. This transaction cost comes from the trader's inability to share risk freely with the rest of the futures market. Even in its absence, futures markets will be illiquid if its mechanism allows for multiple prices. This suggests that a single price mechanism increases liquidity in the futures markets by forcing the sharing of risks, abstracting from traditional trading costs that would create effectively a bid-ask spread.","PeriodicalId":126917,"journal":{"name":"European Financial Management Association Meetings (EFMA) (Archive)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Financial Management Association Meetings (EFMA) (Archive)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.364861","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

In general, index and commodity futures markets are considered to be highly liquid. Yet these markets can quickly become illiquid in periods of high uncertainty. So far, there exists no theoretical explanation as to why liquid futures markets can become illiquid in these periods of high uncertainty. This paper shows how illiquidity creates theoretically an endogenous transaction cost increasing with the variance of the spot price and the volume of trades in the futures market generated by hedging pressures. High uncertainty represented by high volatility in the spot market drives out liquidity in the futures market the larger the trades. This transaction cost comes from the trader's inability to share risk freely with the rest of the futures market. Even in its absence, futures markets will be illiquid if its mechanism allows for multiple prices. This suggests that a single price mechanism increases liquidity in the futures markets by forcing the sharing of risks, abstracting from traditional trading costs that would create effectively a bid-ask spread.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
风险分担中的内生非流动性交易成本
一般来说,指数和商品期货市场被认为是高流动性的。然而,在高度不确定性时期,这些市场可能很快变得缺乏流动性。到目前为止,还没有理论解释为什么流动性好的期货市场在这些高度不确定性的时期会变得缺乏流动性。本文从理论上说明了流动性不足是如何产生内生交易成本的,这一内生交易成本随着现货价格的变化和期货市场上对冲压力所产生的交易量的变化而增加。以现货市场的高波动性为代表的高不确定性,使得交易规模越大的期货市场流动性越差。这种交易成本来自于交易者无法与期货市场的其他参与者自由分担风险。即使没有它,如果其机制允许多种价格,期货市场也将缺乏流动性。这表明,单一的价格机制通过迫使风险分担来增加期货市场的流动性,从而从传统的交易成本中抽象化,而传统的交易成本实际上会产生买卖价差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Valuing Companies by Cash Flow Discounting: Ten Methods and Nine Theories Learning About Beta: Time-Varying Factor Loadings, Expected Returns, and the Conditional CAPM Equivalence of the Different Discounted Cash Flow Valuation Methods: Different Alternatives for Determining the Discounted Value of Tax Shields and Their Implications for the Valuation Capital Structure in Venture Finance The International Evidence on Performance and Equity Ownership by Insiders, Blockholders, and Institutions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1