2010
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.1752843
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Effect of Maker-Taker Pricing on Market Liquidity in Electronic Trading Systems – Empirical Evidence from European Equity Trading

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 19 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…An interesting theory, suggested in [2] and developed in [6] is that make-take fees have actually no impact on trading costs in the sense that the cum fee bid-ask spread should not depend on the make-take fees policy. This result is consistent with the empirical findings in [20,22]. Nevertheless, it is clearly shown in these works that many important trading parameters such as depths, volumes or price impact do depend on the make-take fees structure, see also [14].…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 90%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…An interesting theory, suggested in [2] and developed in [6] is that make-take fees have actually no impact on trading costs in the sense that the cum fee bid-ask spread should not depend on the make-take fees policy. This result is consistent with the empirical findings in [20,22]. Nevertheless, it is clearly shown in these works that many important trading parameters such as depths, volumes or price impact do depend on the make-take fees structure, see also [14].…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 90%
“…The martingale property of M now follows from the boundedness of u as it can be verified from the expression (20). Finally, the bound |Q t,q s | ≤q induces directly the announced bounds on u, which in turn imply Condition (17) when (22) is satisfied because v = −u − ση k .…”
Section: The Hjb Equation For the Reduced Exchange Problemmentioning
confidence: 84%
“…Following various studies before (e.g. Lutat (2010)) and to further increase comparability between segments, we divide the sample into three equal sized sub-samples in order to compare similar priced and valued instruments with one another. This approach further allows for a distinct assignment of each individual effect to each price and liquidity segment.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In contrast to our work, they find that the breakdown of the total fee into maker rebates and taker fees has no effect on quoted spreads. It is our understanding, however, that in Lutat (2010) and Cardella, Hao, and Kalcheva (2012), changes in the maker-taker fees are accompanied by changes in the total fee. Unique to our paper is a focus on the breakdown of the total fee into the maker rebate and the taker fee, holding the total fee constant.…”
mentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Barclay, Kandel, and Marx (1998) empirically study the effect of changes in bid-ask spreads on volume and prices and find that higher transaction costs reduce trading volume. Lutat (2010) argues that the Swiss Stock Exchange's removal of a maker fee (without changing the taker fee) did not affect quoted spreads. Cardella, Hao, and Kalcheva (2012) study a number of maker-taker fee changes in the United States from 2008 to 2010.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%