I show that dual trading reduces the net order flow and market depth. Trading volume and gross (of commission fees) profits of informed traders are lower with dual trading, while trading volume and gross losses of uninformed traders are unaffected. When the broker′s commission income is independent of the customer′s trading volume, the competitive commission fee is lower with dual trading. The utility of uninformed traders (net of commission fees) increases with dual trading, while the net profits of informed traders decrease. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers: G12, G13, D82.

It is shown that the models of Spiegel and Subrahmanyam (1992, Rev. Finan. Stud.5(2), 307–329) and Kyle (1985, Econometrica53, 1315–1335) are equivalent in the following sense: the equilibrium values of market depth, the expected total trading volume and the expected price level are the same in the two models. Equivalence exists whenever the uniformed traders hedge all of their endowments of risky shares. This occurs under two sets of parameter configurations. In both cases, the linear equilibrium in the hedger model always exists. Journal of Economic Literature Classification Numbers; G12, G14, D82.

This article explores cross-market liquidity dynamics by estimating a vector autoregressive model for liquidity (bid-ask spread and depth, returns, volatility, and order flow in the stock and Treasury bond markets). Innovations to stock and bond market liquidity and volatility are significantly correlated, implying that common factors drive liquidity and volatility in these markets. Volatility shocks are informative in predicting shifts in liquidity. During crisis periods, monetary expansions are associated with increased liquidity. Moreover, money flows to government bond funds forecast bond market liquidity. The results establish a link between "macro" liquidity, or money flows, and "micro" or transactions liquidity.

We infer motives for trade initiation from market sidedness. We define trading as more two‐sided (one‐sided) if the correlation between the number of buyer‐ and seller‐initiated trades increases (decreases), and assess changes in sidedness (relative to a control sample) around events that identify trade initiators. Consistent with asymmetric information, trading is more one‐sided before merger news. Consistent with belief heterogeneity, trading is more two‐sided before earnings and macro announcements with greater dispersion in analyst forecasts, and after news with larger announcement surprises. We examine the codeterminacy of sidedness, bid‐ask spread, volatility, number of trades, and order imbalance.

Peter R. Locke, Asani Sarkar, Lifan Wu, Market Liquidity and Trader Welfare in Multiple Dealer Markets: Evidence from Dual Trading Restrictions, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 34, No. 1 (Mar., 1999), pp. 57-88

The Term Auction Facility (TAF), the first auction-based liquidity initiative by the Federal Reserve during the global financial crisis, was aimed at improving conditions in the dollar money market and bringing down the significantly elevated London interbank offered rate (Libor). The effectiveness of this innovative policy tool is crucial for understanding the role of the central bank in financial stability, but academic studies disagree on the empirical evidence of the TAF effect on Libor. We show that the disagreement arises from mis-specifications of econometric models. Regressions using the daily level of the Libor-OIS spread as the dependent variable miss either the permanent or temporary TAF effect, depending on whether the dummy variable indicates the events of the TAF or the regimes before and after an TAF event. Those regressions also suffer from the unit-root problem and produce unreliable test statistics. By contrast, regressions using the daily change in the Libor-OIS spread are robust to the persistence of the TAF effect and the unit-root problem, consistently producing reliable evidence that the downward shifts of the Libor-OIS spread were associated with the TAF. The evidence indicates the efficacy of the TAF in helping the interbank market to relieve liquidity strains.

We examine whether U.S. banks subject to the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR) reduce lending (an unintended consequence) and/or become more resilient to liquidity shocks, as intended by regulators. We find that LCR banks tighten lending standards, and reduce liquidity creation that occurs mainly through lower lending relative to non-LCR banks. However, covered banks also contribute less to fire-sale externalities relative to exempt banks. For LCR banks, we estimate that the total after-tax benefits of reduced fire-sale risk (net of the costs associated with foregone lending) exceed $50 billion from 2013Q2 to 2017, mostly accruing to the largest LCR banks. Non-LCR regulations enacted during our sample period cannot fully account for these findings. For the banking sector as a whole, lending migrates to smaller, non-LCR banks so that lending shares increase but fire-sale risk does not decrease. Our results highlight the trade-off between liquidity creation and resiliency arising from liquidity regulations that underlie the debate on whether the LCR should be extended following the banking crisis of March 2023.

We provide empirical evidence for the existence, magnitude, and economic cost of stigma associated with banks borrowing from the Federal Reserve's Discount Window (DW) during the 2007–2008 financial crisis. We find that banks were willing to pay a premium of around 44 basis points (bps) across funding sources (126bps after the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers) to avoid borrowing from the DW. DW stigma is economically relevant as it increased some banks' borrowing cost by 32bps of their pre-tax return on assets (ROA) during the crisis. The implications of our results for the provision of liquidity by central banks are discussed.

This paper examines the relation between information transmission and cross-autocorrelations. We present a simple model, where informed trading is transmitted from large to small stocks with a lag. In equilibrium, large stock illiquidity induced by informed trading portends stronger cross-autocorrelations. Empirically, we find that the lead-lag relation increases with lagged large stock illiquidity. Further, the lead from large stock order flows to small stock returns is stronger when large stock spreads are higher. In addition, this lead-lag relation is stronger before macro announcements (when information-based trading is more likely) and weaker afterward (when information asymmetries are lower).

This paper explores liquidity movements in stock and Treasury bond markets over a period of more than 1800 trading days. Cross-market dynamics in liquidity are documented by estimating a vector autoregressive model for liquidity (that is, bid-ask spreads and depth), returns, volatility, and order flow in the stock and bond markets. We find that a shock to quoted spreads in one market affects the spreads in both markets, and that return volatility is an important driver of liquidity. Innovations to stock and bond market liquidity and volatility prove to be significantly correlated, suggesting that common factors drive liquidity and volatility in both markets. Monetary expansion increases equity market liquidity during periods of financial crises, and unexpected increases (decreases) in the federal funds rate lead to decreases (increases) in liquidity and increases (decreases) in stock and bond volatility. Finally, we find that flows to the stock and government bond sectors play an important role in forecasting stock and bond liquidity. The results establish a link between 'macro' liquidity, or money flows, and 'micro' or transactions liquidity.