Bid-Ask Spread: Theory and Empirical Evidence

M. Nimalendran, Giovanni Petrella
{"title":"Bid-Ask Spread: Theory and Empirical Evidence","authors":"M. Nimalendran, Giovanni Petrella","doi":"10.1093/acrefore/9780190625979.013.603","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The most important friction studied in the microstructure literature is the adverse selection borne by liquidity providers when facing traders who are better informed, and the bid-ask spread quoted by market makers is one of these frictions in securities markets that has been extensively studied. In the early 1980s, the transparency of U.S. stock markets was limited to post-trade end-of-day transactions prices, and there were no easily available market quotes for researchers and market participants to study the effects of bid-ask spread on the liquidity and quality of markets. This led to models that used the auto-covariance of daily transactions prices to estimate the bid-ask spread. In the early 1990s, the U.S. stock markets (NYSE/AMEX/NASDAQ) provided pre-trade quotes and transaction sizes for researchers and market participants. The increased transparency and access to quotes and trades led to the development of theoretical models and empirical methods to decompose the bid-ask spread into its components: adverse selection, inventory, and order processing. These models and methods can be broadly classified into those that use the serial covariance properties of quotes and transaction prices, and others that use a trade direction indicator and a regression approach to decompose the bid-ask spread. Covariance and trade indicator models are equivalent in structural form, but they differ in parameters’ estimation (reduced form). The basic microstructure model is composed of two equations; the first defines the law of motion of the “true” price, while the second defines the process generating transaction price. From these two equations, an appropriate relation for transaction price changes is derived in terms of observed variables. A crucial point that differentiates the two approaches is the assumption made for estimation purposes relative to the behavior of order arrival, which is the probability of order reversal or continuation. Thus, the specification of the most general models allows for including an additional parameter that accounts for order behavior. The article provides a unified framework to compare the different models with respect to the restrictions that are imposed, and how this affects the relative proportions of the different components of the spread.","PeriodicalId":211658,"journal":{"name":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-12-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Economics and Finance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/acrefore/9780190625979.013.603","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The most important friction studied in the microstructure literature is the adverse selection borne by liquidity providers when facing traders who are better informed, and the bid-ask spread quoted by market makers is one of these frictions in securities markets that has been extensively studied. In the early 1980s, the transparency of U.S. stock markets was limited to post-trade end-of-day transactions prices, and there were no easily available market quotes for researchers and market participants to study the effects of bid-ask spread on the liquidity and quality of markets. This led to models that used the auto-covariance of daily transactions prices to estimate the bid-ask spread. In the early 1990s, the U.S. stock markets (NYSE/AMEX/NASDAQ) provided pre-trade quotes and transaction sizes for researchers and market participants. The increased transparency and access to quotes and trades led to the development of theoretical models and empirical methods to decompose the bid-ask spread into its components: adverse selection, inventory, and order processing. These models and methods can be broadly classified into those that use the serial covariance properties of quotes and transaction prices, and others that use a trade direction indicator and a regression approach to decompose the bid-ask spread. Covariance and trade indicator models are equivalent in structural form, but they differ in parameters’ estimation (reduced form). The basic microstructure model is composed of two equations; the first defines the law of motion of the “true” price, while the second defines the process generating transaction price. From these two equations, an appropriate relation for transaction price changes is derived in terms of observed variables. A crucial point that differentiates the two approaches is the assumption made for estimation purposes relative to the behavior of order arrival, which is the probability of order reversal or continuation. Thus, the specification of the most general models allows for including an additional parameter that accounts for order behavior. The article provides a unified framework to compare the different models with respect to the restrictions that are imposed, and how this affects the relative proportions of the different components of the 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
买卖价差:理论与经验证据
微观结构文献中研究的最重要的摩擦是流动性提供者在面对消息更灵通的交易者时所承担的逆向选择,而做市商所报的买卖价差是证券市场中被广泛研究的摩擦之一。在20世纪80年代初,美国股票市场的透明度仅限于交易后的日尾交易价格,研究人员和市场参与者没有容易获得的市场报价来研究买卖价差对市场流动性和质量的影响。这导致了使用每日交易价格的自动协方差来估计买卖价差的模型。20世纪90年代初,美国股票市场(NYSE/AMEX/NASDAQ)为研究人员和市场参与者提供交易前报价和交易规模。透明度的提高以及对报价和交易的获取导致了理论模型和实证方法的发展,这些模型和实证方法将买卖价差分解为其组成部分:逆向选择、库存和订单处理。这些模型和方法可以大致分为使用报价和交易价格的序列协方差属性的模型和方法,以及使用交易方向指标和回归方法分解买卖价差的模型和方法。协方差模型和贸易指标模型在结构形式上是等价的,但在参数估计(约简形式)上有所不同。基本微观结构模型由两个方程组成;前者定义了“真实”价格的运动规律,而后者定义了产生交易价格的过程。从这两个方程中,根据观察到的变量推导出交易价格变化的适当关系。区分这两种方法的一个关键点是为估计目的而做出的假设,相对于订单到达的行为,这是订单逆转或延续的概率。因此,大多数通用模型的规范允许包括一个解释顺序行为的附加参数。本文提供了一个统一的框架,以比较不同的模型所施加的限制,以及这如何影响传播的不同组成部分的相对比例。
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
The Economic Implications of Training for Firm Performance The 1918–1919 Influenza Pandemic in Economic History The Macroeconomics of Stratification Applications of Web Scraping in Economics and Finance Lobbying in the Political Economy of International Trade
×
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