Anonymity, Adverse Selection, and the Sorting of Interdealer Trades
- 25 August 2004
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Oxford University Press (OUP) in The Review of Financial Studies
- Vol. 18 (2) , 599-636
- https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhi005
Abstract
This article uses unique data from the London Stock Exchange to examine how trader anonymity and market liquidity affect dealers' decisions about where to place interdealer trades. During our sample period, dealers could trade with each other in the direct, nonanonymous public market or use one of four anonymous brokered trading systems. Surprisingly, we find that adverse selection is less prevalent in the anonymous brokered markets. We show that this pattern can be explained by the way dealers “price” the adverse selection risk inherent in trading with other dealers. We also relate our findings to recent changes in dealer markets.Keywords
This publication has 46 references indexed in Scilit:
- Why Do Larger Orders Receive Discounts on the London Stock Exchange?The Review of Financial Studies, 2004
- Expandable limit order marketsJournal of Financial Markets, 2004
- Competition among Trading Venues: Information and Trading on Electronic Communications NetworksThe Journal of Finance, 2003
- Lifting the Veil: An Analysis of Pre-trade Transparency at the NYSESSRN Electronic Journal, 2003
- Supply Contraction and Trading Protocol: An Examination of Recent Changes in the U.S. Treasury MarketJournal of Money, Credit and Banking, 2002
- FX Trading... LIVE! Dealer Behavior and Trading Systems in Foreign Exchange MarketsSSRN Electronic Journal, 2000
- Market Transparency: Who Wins and Who Loses?The Review of Financial Studies, 1999
- Optimal control of execution costsJournal of Financial Markets, 1998
- Splitting OrdersThe Review of Financial Studies, 1997
- Price Formation and Equilibrium Liquidity in Fragmented and Centralized MarketsThe Journal of Finance, 1993