Springer Nature is making Coronavirus research free. View research | View latest news | Sign up for updates

Demutualization, outsider ownership, and stock exchange performance: empirical evidence

  • 313 Accesses

  • 18 Citations


We employ a balanced panel data set of 28 stock exchanges to disentangle the effects of demutualization and outsider ownership on the operative performance of stock exchanges. For this purpose we calculate in a first step individual efficiency and factor productivity values via Data Envelopment Analysis. In a second step we regress the derived values on variables that—amongst others—represent the different governance regimes of exchanges in order to examine technical efficiency and factor productivity differences between (1) mutuals, (2) demutualized but customer-owned exchanges, and (3) publicly listed and thus at least partly outsider-owned exchanges. We find evidence that demutualized exchanges exhibit higher technical efficiency than mutuals. However, they perform relatively poor as far as productivity growth is concerned. Furthermore, we find no evidence that publicly listed exchanges possess higher efficiency and productivity values than demutualized exchanges with a customer-dominated structure.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Aggarwal R (2002) Demutualization and corporate governance of stock exchanges. J Appl Corp Finance 15(1):105–112

  2. Aggarwal R, Dahiya S (2005) Demutualization and public offerings of financial exchanges. Working paper

  3. Berger AN, Humphrey DB (1997) Efficiency of financial institutions: international survey and directions for future research. Eur J Oper Res 98:175–212

  4. Bradley E, Tibshirani R (1993) An introduction to the bootstrap. Chapman & Hall/CRS, Boca Raton

  5. Caves D, Christensen L, Diewert W (1982) The economic theory of index numbers and the measurement of input, output, and productivity. Econometrica 50(6):1393–1414

  6. Charnes A, Cooper W, Rhodes E (1978) Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. Eur J Oper Res 2(6):429–444

  7. Charnes A, Cooper W, Rhodes E (1981) Evaluating program and managerial efficiency: an application of data envelopment analysis to progra

  8. P (1994) Technical efficiency in the decentralized care of the developmentally disabled. Rev Econ Stat 76:340–345

  9. Elliott J (2002) Demutualization of securities exchanges: a regulatory perspective. IMF Working Paper

  10. Farrell M (1957) The measurement of productive efficiency. J R Stat Soc 120(3):253–290

  11. Färe R, Grosskopf S, Norris M, Zhang Z (1994) Productivity growth, technical progress, and efficiency change in industrialized countries. Am Econ Rev 84(1):66–83

  12. Fried H, Lovell KC, Schmidt S (1993) The measurement of productive effiency, techniques and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford New York

  13. Handa P, Schwartz R, Tiwari A (2004) The economic value of a trading floor: evidence from the american stock exchange. J Bus 77(2):331–355

  14. Hansmann H (1996) The ownership of enterprise. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge

  15. Hart O, Moore J (1996) The governance of exchanges: member’s cooperatives versus outside ownership. Oxf Rev Econ Policy 12(4):53–69

  16. Johnston J, DiNardo J (1997) Econometric methods. McGraw-Hill, Singapore

  17. Karmel R (2000) Turning seats into shares: implications of demutualization for the regulation of stock and futures exchanges. Working paper

  18. Krishnamurti C, Sequeira JM, Fangjian F (2003) Stock exchange governance and market quality. J Bank Finance 27(9):1859–1878

  19. McCarty T, Yaisawarng S (1993) The measuremet of productive efficiency, techniques and applications chap technical efficiency in New Jersey School Districts, pp. 271–287. Oxford University Press, New York

  20. Mendiola A, O’Hara M (2003) Taking stock in stock markets: the changing governance of exchanges. Working Paper, Cornell University

  21. OECD (2003) Demutualization and corporate governance of stock exchanges. Financ Mark Trends (85):89–117

  22. Pagano M, Randl O, Röell AA, Zechner J (2001) What makes stock exchanges succeed? Evidence from cross-listing decisions. Eur Econ Rev 45:770–782

  23. Pestieau P, Tulkens H (1993) Assessing the performance of the public sector activities: some recent evidence from the productive efficiency viewpoint. Finanz Arch 50(3):293–323

  24. Pirrong C (2000) Technological change, for profit exchanges, and self-regulation in financial markets. Working Paper, Washington University

  25. Schmiedel H (2001) Technological development and concentration of stock exchanges in Europe. Bank of Finland discussion paper no. 21

  26. Schmiedel H (2002) Total factor productivity growth in European stock exchanges: a non-parametric frontier approach. Bank of Finland discussion paper no. 11

  27. Scullion M (2001) Demutualisation: the challenges facing global exchanges. In: The compaq handbook of world stock, derivative & commodity exchanges. Mondo Visione, pp xxv–xxxii

  28. Serifsoy B, Weiss M (2007) The European securities transaction industry. In: Efficient organizational design—balancing incentives and power. Palgrave Macmillan (forthcoming)

  29. Steil B (2002) Changes in the ownership and governance of securities exchanges: causes and consequences. In: Brookings-Wharton papers on financial services, vol V, pp 61–91

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Baris Serifsoy.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Serifsoy, B. Demutualization, outsider ownership, and stock exchange performance: empirical evidence. Econ Gov 9, 305 (2008).

Download citation


  • Exchanges
  • Demutualization
  • Efficiency
  • DEA
  • Malmquist-productivity
  • Tobit panel data regressions
  • Bootstrapping

JEL Classification

  • F 39
  • G 32
  • C 23
  • C 24
  • C 61