Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-lpg2g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T16:24:06.300Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Continuous Versus Intermittent Trading on Auction Markets

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Seymour Smidt
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The first hypothesis underlying this study is that successive transactions exhibit systematic patterns. These patterns will be studied to better understand (1) the processes by which transactions are arranged, (2) the costs of transacting, and (3) the statistical characteristics of the reported transactions prices and their relationship to the market equilibrium. This study will not directly consider market efficiency, though its results may eventually lead to more searching and meaningful studies of market efficiency.

Information

Type
IV. Empirical Studies Relating to the Structure of Securities Markets
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 14 , Issue 4 , November 1979, pp. 837 - 866
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

[1]Alexander, S. S. “Price Movements in Speculative Markets: Trends or Random Walks.” Industrial Management Review, Vol. 2, No. 2 (05 1961), pp. 7–26.Google Scholar
[2]Bagehot, W. “The Only Game in Town.” FinancialAnalysts Journal (03/04 1971), pp. 12–14.Google Scholar
[3]Barnea, A. “Performance Evaluation of New York Stock Exchange Specialists.” Journal of Financialand Quantitative Analysis, Vol.9, No. 3 (09 1974), pp. 511–911.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Benston, G. J., and Hagerman, R. L.. “Risk, Volume and Spread.” Financial Analysts Journal (01–02 1978), pp. 46–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Branch, B., and Freed, W.. “Bid–Ask Spreads on the Amex and the Big Board.” The Journal of Finance, Vol. 32, No. 1 (03 1977), pp. 159–163.Google Scholar
[6]Demsetz, H. “The Cost of Transacting.” Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 82, No. 1 (02 1968), pp. 33–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Fama, E. F., and Blume, M. E.. “Filter Rules and Stock Market Trading.” Journal of Business, Vol. 40 (1966), pp. 226–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Garbade, K., and Lieber, Z.. “On the Independence of Transactions on the New York Stock Exchange.” Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 1 (1977), pp. 151–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Garman, M. “Market Microstructure.” Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 3 (1976), pp. 257–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Hamilton, J. L. “Competition, Scale Economics and Transaction Cost in the Stock Market.” Journal of Financialand Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 11, No. 5 (12 1976), pp. 779–802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Jarecki, H. G. “Bullion Dealing, Commodity Exchange Trading and the London Gold Fixing: Three Forms of Commodity Auctions.” In Biddingand Auctioning for Procurement and Allocation, edited by Amihud, Yakov. New York: New York University Press (1976), pp. 173–186.Google Scholar
[12]Melnik, A., and Offer, A. R.. “Determinants of Commission Rates for Bank Trust Stock Transactions.” Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 2 (1978), pp. 355–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Niederhoffer, V., and Osborne, M. F. M.. “Market Making and Reversals on the Stock Exchange.” Journal of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 61, No. 316 (12 1966), pp. 897–916.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Oldfield, G. S. Jr,; Rogalski, R. J.; and Jarrow, R. A.. “An Autoregressive Jump Process for Common Stock Returns.” Journal of Banking and Finance, Vol. 5 (1977), pp. 389–418.Google Scholar
[15]Oldfield, G. S. Jr, and Rogalski, R. J.. “A Theory of Common Stock Returns over Trading and Non-Trading Periods.” Unpublished manuscript Graduate School of Business and Public Administration, Cornell University and The Amos Tuck School of Business Administration, Dartmouth College (01 1979).Google Scholar
[16]Simmons, D. “Common–Stock Transaction Sequences and the Random Walk Model.” Operations Research, Vol. 19 (07–08 1971), pp. 845–861.Google Scholar
[17]Silber, W. L. “Thinness in Capital Markets: the Case of the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange.” Journal of Financialand Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 10, No. 1 (03 1975), pp. 129–142.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18]Smidt, S. “A Test of the Serial Independence of Price Changes in Soybean Futures.” Food Research InstituteStudies, Vol. 5, No. 2 (1965), pp. 117–136.Google Scholar
[19]Smidt, S.. “A New Look at the Random Walk Hypothesis.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 3, No. 3 (09 1968), pp. 235–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20]Smidt, S.. “Which Road to an Efficient Stock Market: Free Competition or Regulated Monopoly.” Financial Analysts Journal (09–10 1971), pp. 18ff.Google Scholar
[21]Stoll, S. “Dealer Inventory Behavior: An Empirical Investigation of NASDAQ Stocks.” Journal of Financialand QuantitativeAnalysis, Vol. 11, No. 3 (09 1976), pp. 359–380.Google Scholar
[22]Stoll, S.. “The Supply of Dealer Services in Securities Markets.” Journal of Finance, Vol. 33, No. 4 (09 1978), pp. 1133–1151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[23]Tinic, S. M. “The Economics of Liquidity Services.” The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Vol. 86, No. 1 (02 1972), pp. 79–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[24]U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission. InstitutionalInvestor Study Report, House Document 92–64. Washington: Government Printing Office (1971).Google Scholar
[25]Working, H. “Price Effects of Scalping and Day Trading.” Proceedings of the 7th Annual SymposiumCommodityMarkets and the PublicInterest (1954).Google Scholar