World Scientific
  • Search
    Quick Search in Journals
    Access type:
    Quick Search anywhere
    Access type:
    Advanced Search
  • My Cart
  •   
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×
Free Access

Tick Size, Institutional Trading, and Market Making: A Study of the SEC Tick Size Pilot Program

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S2010139222500082Cited by:0 (Source: Crossref)
    Previous
    Next

    Abstract

    Using the 2016 SEC Tick Size Pilot Program, we study the effects of an increase in tick size on institutional trading, market making costs, profitability, and activities. We find that increasing the tick size deters institutional trading participation, as it results in unfavorable stock characteristics, such as greater price impact and depressed share prices. In particular, we show that the implementation of the pilot program creates a substitution effect, which causes mutual funds to migrate from pilot (wider-tick) stocks to control (narrower-tick) peers. Furthermore, we document that widening the tick size increases adverse selection and inventory costs and thus reduces market making profitability, leading to lower market-making activities. Further analysis shows that these adverse effects can be attributed to the trade-at rule that prevents price-matching in non-displaying trading centers, while the quote rule that mandates a minimum quote increment of five cents enriches market makers and promotes liquidity provision. Finally, we show that our results are more pronounced for tick-constrained stocks than for unconstrained ones. Overall, the evidence contradicts the SEC’s intent to use a larger tick size to incentivize market making in small-cap stocks and attract more investors to trade these stocks, and dispraises the “one-size-fits-all” approach undertaken by regulators.

    References

    • Albuquerque, R., S. Song, and C. Yao, 2020, The Price Effects of Liquidity Shocks: A Study of the SEC’s Tick Size Experiment, Journal of Financial Economics 138, 700–724. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Angel, J. J., 1997, Tick Size, Share Prices, and Stock Splits, The Journal of Finance 52, 655–681. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Anshuman, V. R., and A. Kalay, 1998, Market Making with Discrete Prices, The Review of Financial Studies 11, 81–109. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Bacidore, J. M., 1997, The Impact of Decimalization on Market Quality: An Empirical Investigation of the Toronto Stock Exchange, Journal of Financial Intermediation 6, 92–120. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Bacidore, J. M., 2001, Decimalization, Adverse Selection, and Market Maker Rents, Journal of Banking & Finance 25, 829–855. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Bartlett III R. P., and J. McCrary, 2020, Subsidizing Liquidity with Wider Ticks: Evidence from the Tick Size Pilot Study, Journal of Empirical Legal Studies 17, 262–316. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Boehmer, E., C. M. Jones, and X. Zhang, 2020, Potential Pilot Problems: Treatment Spillovers in Financial Regulatory Experiments, Journal of Financial Economics 135, 68–87. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Chan, L. K., and J. Lakonishok, 1995, The Behavior of Stock Prices around Institutional Trades, The Journal of Finance 50, 1147–1174. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Chao, Y., C. Yao, and M. Ye, 2017, Discrete Pricing and Market Fragmentation: A Tale of Two-Sided Markets, American Economic Review 107, 196–199. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Chao, Y., C. Yao, and M. Ye, 2019, Why Discrete Price Fragments U.S. Stock Exchanges and Disperses Their Fee Structures, The Review of Financial Studies 32, 1068–1101. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Chen, J., H. Hong, and J. C. Stein, 2002, Breadth of ownership and stock returns, Journal of Financial Economics 66, 171–205. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Comerton-Forde, C., V. Grégoire, and Z. Zhong, 2019, Inverted fee structures, tick size, and market quality, Journal of Financial Economics 134, 141–164. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Cordella, T., and T. Foucault, 1999, Minimum Price Variations, Time Priority, and Quote Dynamics, Journal of Financial Intermediation 8, 141–173. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Cox, J., B. Van Ness, and R. Van Ness, 2019, Increasing the Tick: Examining the Impact of the Tick Size Change on Maker-Taker and Taker-Maker Market Models. Financial Review 54, 417–449. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Easley, D., N. M. Kiefer, M. O’hara, and J. B. Paperman, 1996, Liquidity, Information, and Infrequently Traded Stocks, The Journal of Finance 51, 1405–1436. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Easley, D., M. López de Prado, M. O’Hara, and Z. Zhang, 2021, Microstructure in the Machine Age, The Review of Financial Studies 34, 3316–3363. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Falkenstein, E. G., 1996, Preferences for Stock Characteristics as Revealed by Mutual Fund Portfolio Holdings, The Journal of Finance 51, 111–135. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Fernando, C. S., V. A. Gatchev, and P. A. Spindt, 2012, Institutional Ownership, Analyst Following, and Share Prices, Journal of Banking & Finance 36, 2175–2189. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Gibson, S., R. Singh, and V. Yerramilli, 2003, The Effect of Decimalization on the Components of the Bid-Ask Spread, Journal of Financial Intermediation 12, 121–148. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Gompers, P. A., and A. Metrick, 2001, Institutional Investors and Equity Prices, The Quarterly Journal of Economics 116, 229–259. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Griffith, T. G., and B. S. Roseman, 2019, Making Cents of Tick Sizes: The Effect of the 2016 U.S. SEC Tick Size Pilot on Limit Order Book Liquidity, Journal of Banking & Finance 101, 104–121. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Griffiths, M. D., B. F. Smith, D. A. S. Turnbull, and R. W. White, 1998, The Role of Tick Size in Upstairs Trading and Downstairs Trading, Journal of Financial Intermediation 7, 393–417. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Huang, J., 2020, Dynamic Liquidity Preferences of Mutual Funds, Quarterly Journal of Finance 10, 2050018. Link, Google Scholar
    • Huang, R. D., and H. R. Stoll, 1997, The Components of the Bid-Ask Spread: A General Approach, The Review of Financial Studies 10, 995–1034. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Kadan, O., 2006, So Who Gains from a Small Tick Size? Journal of Financial Intermediation 15, 32–66. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Keim, D. B., and A. Madhavan, 1997, Transactions Costs and Investment Style: An Inter-exchange Analysis of Institutional Equity Trades, Journal of Financial Economics 46, 265–292. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Kumar, A., 2009, Who Gambles in the Stock Market? The Journal of Finance 64, 1889–1933. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Lechner, M., N. Rodriguez-Planas, and D. Fernández Kranz, 2016, Difference-in-Difference Estimation by FE and OLS When There Is Panel Non-response, Journal of Applied Statistics 43, 2044–2052. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Lee, C. M., and M. J. Ready, 1991, Inferring Trade Direction from Intraday Data, The Journal of Finance 46, 733–746. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Muravyev, D., 2016, Order Flow and Expected Option Returns, The Journal of Finance 71, 673–708. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • O’Hara, M., G. Saar, and Z. Zhong, 2019, Relative Tick Size and the Trading Environment, The Review of Asset Pricing Studies 9, 47–90. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Phalippou, L., and M. Massa, 2005, Mutual Funds and the Market for Liquidity. Available at SSRN 609883. Google Scholar
    • Rindi, B., and I. M. Werner, 2019, U.S. Tick Size Pilot, Fisher College of Business Working Paper No. 2017-03-018, Charles A Dice Center Working Paper No. 2017-18, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3041644 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3041644. Google Scholar
    • Schultz, P., 2000, Stock splits, tick size, and sponsorship, The Journal of Finance 55, 429–450. Crossref, Google Scholar
    • Yao, M., and C. Ye, 2014, Tick Size Constraints, Market Structure, and Liquidity, WBS Finance Group Research Paper No. 212, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2359000 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2359000. Google Scholar
    • Ye, M., C. Yao, and J. Gai, 2019, The Externalities of High Frequency Trading, WBS Finance Group Research Paper. Google Scholar