2017
DOI: 10.2139/ssrn.2910438
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Trading Fees and Intermarket Competition

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
1

Relationship

0
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 4 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 34 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Recent theories investigating the effect of maker-taker pricing on market quality show that if prices are continuous, only the net fees are relevant (Colliard and Foucault, 2012), whereas in the presence of discrete prices the fee breakdown affects agents' order submission behavior (Foucault et al, 2013). Panayides et al (2017) extend this insight to fragmented markets and show that maker-taker fees lead to a migration of limit and market orders across venues. Chao et al (2018) show that, in the presence of a fixed tick size, exchanges use such alternative fee structures to attract traders to their market by offering a finer (implicit) pricing grid.…”
mentioning
confidence: 82%
“…Recent theories investigating the effect of maker-taker pricing on market quality show that if prices are continuous, only the net fees are relevant (Colliard and Foucault, 2012), whereas in the presence of discrete prices the fee breakdown affects agents' order submission behavior (Foucault et al, 2013). Panayides et al (2017) extend this insight to fragmented markets and show that maker-taker fees lead to a migration of limit and market orders across venues. Chao et al (2018) show that, in the presence of a fixed tick size, exchanges use such alternative fee structures to attract traders to their market by offering a finer (implicit) pricing grid.…”
mentioning
confidence: 82%