Does the Diversity and Solvency of Authorized Participants Matter for Bond ETF Arbitrage? Evidence from the Dash for Cash Episode

C. Raddatz
{"title":"Does the Diversity and Solvency of Authorized Participants Matter for Bond ETF Arbitrage? Evidence from the Dash for Cash Episode","authors":"C. Raddatz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3868529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Authorized participants’ (APs) arbitrage in primary markets for ETF shares plays a key role in limiting dislocation in ETF prices. This paper builds a novel dataset of detailed US bond ETF-AP relationships and shows that high AP leverage played a significant role in weakening this arbitrage during the dash-for-cash episode of March 2020. The strength of the arbitrage relationship linking price signals to primary market activity weakened by 77 percent in ETFs related to more leveraged APs versus 64 percent for ETFs linked to less leveraged APs. This effect was particularly strong among those ETFs focusing on less liquid asset classes, relying on APs engaging in high-frequency trading strategies, and unrelated to banks and bank holding companies. Policy announcements by the Federal Reserve did not have had a strong impact in restoring arbitrage strength. AP leverage constraints operated in parallel to constraints faced by lead-market makers in secondary ETF markets, which were more closely related to regulatory capital limits.","PeriodicalId":20999,"journal":{"name":"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regulation of Financial Institutions eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3868529","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

Authorized participants’ (APs) arbitrage in primary markets for ETF shares plays a key role in limiting dislocation in ETF prices. This paper builds a novel dataset of detailed US bond ETF-AP relationships and shows that high AP leverage played a significant role in weakening this arbitrage during the dash-for-cash episode of March 2020. The strength of the arbitrage relationship linking price signals to primary market activity weakened by 77 percent in ETFs related to more leveraged APs versus 64 percent for ETFs linked to less leveraged APs. This effect was particularly strong among those ETFs focusing on less liquid asset classes, relying on APs engaging in high-frequency trading strategies, and unrelated to banks and bank holding companies. Policy announcements by the Federal Reserve did not have had a strong impact in restoring arbitrage strength. AP leverage constraints operated in parallel to constraints faced by lead-market makers in secondary ETF markets, which were more closely related to regulatory capital limits.
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
授权参与者的多样性和偿付能力对债券ETF套利有影响吗?证据来自"冲现金"那一集
ETF股票一级市场的授权参与者套利在限制ETF价格的错位方面发挥着关键作用。本文建立了一个详细的美国债券ETF-AP关系的新数据集,并表明在2020年3月的套现事件中,高AP杠杆在削弱这种套利方面发挥了重要作用。与杠杆较高的ap相关的etf中,将价格信号与一级市场活动联系起来的套利关系的强度减弱了77%,而与杠杆较低的ap相关的etf则减弱了64%。这种效应在那些专注于流动性较低的资产类别、依赖于参与高频交易策略的ap、与银行和银行控股公司无关的etf中尤为明显。美联储(fed)的政策声明并未对恢复套利力量产生强烈影响。AP杠杆约束与领先做市商在二级ETF市场面临的约束并行,后者与监管资本限制更密切相关。
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
Did FinTech Lenders Facilitate PPP Fraud? Financial Reform and Public Good Provision: Municipal Bankruptcy Law and the Financing of Hospitals How Do Acquisitions Affect the Mental Health of Employees? Anti-Discrimination Insurance Pricing: Regulations, Fairness Criteria, and Models The Unintended Benefits of Increased Disclosure Frequency: Evidence from the Brokerage House Industry
×
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