An empirical examination of the amortized spread1Prior versions of this paper were entitled, `Bid–ask spreads, holding periods, and realized transaction costs.' We are grateful for many helpful comments from Yakov Amihud, Jennifer Conrad, Larry Dann, Diane Del Guercio, Dave Denis, Diane Denis, Craig Dunbar, Ed Dyl, Roger Edelen, Rob Hansen, Mark Huson, Raman Kumar, Chris Lamoureux, John McConnell, Wayne Mikkelson, Megan Partch, Henri Servaes, Vijay Singal, Mike Weisbach, Marc Zenner, and an anonymous referee. In addition, we appreciate the comments from seminar participants at the 1997 American Finance Association meetings, the University of Arizona, Kansas State University, the University of North Carolina, the 1996 Pacific Northwest Finance Conference, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, and the University of Wisconsin. This work has been partially supported by a summer research grant from the Pamplin College of Business.1
Theories of asset pricing suggest that the amortized cost of the spread is relevant to investors' required returns. The amortized spread measures the spread's cost over investors' holding periods and is approximately equal to the spread times share turnover. We examine amortized spreads for Amex and NYSE stocks over the period 1983–1992. We find that stocks with similar spreads can have vastly different share turnover, and thus, a stock's amortized spread cannot be predicted reliably by its spread alone. Consistent with theories of transaction costs, we find stronger evidence that amortized spreads are priced than we find for unamortized spreads.