Financial Markets and Portfolio Management

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 93–103 | Cite as

Competition between financial markets in Europe: what can be expected from MiFID?

Open Access
Perspectives

Abstract

The Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID) could be the foundation of new trading platforms in Europe. This contribution employs insights from the theoretical and empirical literature to highlight some of the possible implications of MiFID. In particular, we argue that more competition will lead to more liquid markets, reflected in lower bid–ask spreads and greater depth. It will also lead to innovation in incumbent markets and stimulate the design of new trading platforms. MiFID has already introduced more competition, as evidenced by the startup of Instinet Chi-X, the announcement of new initiatives, including Project Turquoise and BATS, and the reactions of incumbent exchanges.

Keywords

Financial regulation Market microstructure MiFID Trading systems 

JEL Classification

G18 

References

  1. Admati, A., Pfleiderer, P.: Sunshine trading and financial market equilibrium. Rev. Financ. Stud. 4, 443–481 (1991) Google Scholar
  2. Amihud, Y., Mendelson, H., Pedersen, L.H.: Market Microstructure and Asset Pricing. Foundations and Trends in Finance. Now Publishers, Boston (2006) Google Scholar
  3. Barclay, M., Hendershott, T., McCormick, T.: Competition among trading venues: information and trading on electronic communications networks. J. Finance 58, 2637–2666 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Benhamou, E., Serval, T.: On the competition between ECNs, stock markets and market makers. Financial Markets Group discussion paper (2000) Google Scholar
  5. Bernet, B.: Towards an economic analysis of financial markets regulation. Financ. Mark. Portf. Manag. 19, 313–322 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bessembinder, H., Kaufman, H.M.: A cross-exchange comparison of execution costs and information flow for NYSE-listed stocks. J. Financ. Econ. 46, 293–319 (1997) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Biais, B., Glosten, L., Spatt, C.: Market microstructure: a survey of microfoundations, empirical results, and policy implications. J. Financ. Mark. 8, 217–264 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Biais, B., Bisière, C., Spatt, C.: Imperfect competition in financial markets: ISLAND versus NASDAQ. Mimeo (2006) Google Scholar
  9. Boehmer, E., Saar, G., Yu, L.: Lifting the Veil: an analysis of pre-trade transparency at the NYSE. J. Finance 60, 783–815 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Casey, J.P., Lannoo, K.: The MiFID revolution: a policy view. Compet. Regul. Netw. Ind. 1, 515–534 (2006) Google Scholar
  11. Chowdry, B., Nanda, V.: Multimarket trading and market liquidity. Rev. Financ. Stud. 3, 483–511 (1991) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Christie, W., Schultz, P.H.: Why do NASDAQ market makers avoid odd-eighth quotes? J. Finance 49, 1813–1840 (1994) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Christie, W., Harris, J.H., Schultz, P.H.: Why did NASDAQ market makers stop avoiding odd-eighth quotes? J. Finance 49, 1841–1860 (1994) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Conrad, J., Johnson, K., Wahal, S.: Institutional trading and alternative trading systems. J. Financ. Econ. 70, 99–134 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Davies, R.: MiFID and a changing competitive landscape. Mimeo (2008) Google Scholar
  16. Davies, R., Dufour, A., Scott-Quinn, B.: The MiFID: competition in a new European equity market regulatory structure. Mimeo (2005) Google Scholar
  17. De Jong, F., Rindi, B.: The Microstructure of Financial Markets. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2008, forthcoming) Google Scholar
  18. Degryse, H., Van Achter, M., Wuyts, G.: Dynamic order submission strategies with competition between a dealer market and a crossing network. J. Financ. Econ. (2008, forthcoming) Google Scholar
  19. Domowitz, I.: Liquidity, transaction costs, and reintermediation in electronic markets. Working paper (2001) Google Scholar
  20. Domowitz, I., Steil, B.: Automation, trading costs and the structure of the securities trading industry. Brookings-Wharton papers on Financial Services (1999) Google Scholar
  21. Domowitz, I., Glen, J., Madhavan, A.: Global equity trading costs. Working paper (2001) Google Scholar
  22. Easley, D., Kiefer, N.M., O’Hara, M.: Cream-skimming or profit-sharing? The curious role of purchased order flow. J. Finance 51, 811–833 (1996) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Engelen, P.J.: Changes in securities trading landscape in Europe and the US. Compet. Regul. Netw. Ind. 1, 439–451 (2006) Google Scholar
  24. Foucault, T., Menkveld, A.: Competition for order flow and smart order routing systems. J. Finance (2007, forthcoming) Google Scholar
  25. Gemmill, G.: Transparency and liquidity: a study of block trades on the London stock exchange under different publication rules. J. Finance 51, 1765–1790 (1996) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gentzoglanis, A.: Reg NMS and competition in the alternative trading systems in the US. Compet. Regul. Netw. Ind. 1, 497–514 (2006) Google Scholar
  27. Glosten, L.: Is the electronic open limit order book inevitable? J. Finance 49, 1127–1161 (1994) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Glosten, L.: Precedence rules. Working paper, Columbia University (1998) Google Scholar
  29. Gomber, P., Gsell, M.: Catching up with technology—the impact of regulatory changes of ECNs/MTFs and the trading venue landscape in Europe. Compet. Regul. Netw. Ind. 1, 537–557 (2006) Google Scholar
  30. Gresse, C.: The effect of crossing-network trading on dealer market’s bid–ask spreads. Eur. Financ. Manag. 12, 143–160 (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Harris, L.: Consolidation, fragmentation, segmentation and regulation. Financ. Mark. Inst. Instrum. 5, 1–28 (1993) Google Scholar
  32. Hasbrouck, J.: Empirical Market Microstructure. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007) Google Scholar
  33. Hendershott, T., Jones, C.: Island goes dark: transparency, fragmentation, and regulation. Rev. Financ. Stud. 18, 743–793 (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Hendershott, T., Mendelson, H.: Crossing networks and dealer markets: competition and performance. J. Finance 55, 2071–2115 (2000) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Huang, R.: The quality of ECNs and Nasdaq market makers quotes. J. Finance 57, 1285–1317 (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Madhavan, A.: Consolidation, fragmentation and the disclosure of trading information. Rev. Financ. Stud. 8, 579–603 (1995) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Madhavan, A., Porter, D., Weaver, D.: Should securities markets be transparent? J. Financ. Mark. 8, 266–288 (2005) Google Scholar
  38. Næs, R., Ødegaard, B.: Equity trading by institutional investors. To cross or not to cross? J. Financ. Mark. 9, 79–99 (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. O’Hara, M.: Market Microstructure Theory. Blackwell, Cambridge (1995) Google Scholar
  40. Pagano, M.: Trading volume and asset liquidity. Q. J. Econ. 104, 255–274 (1989) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Parlour, C., Seppi, D.: Liquidity-based competition for order flow. Rev. Financ. Stud. 16, 301–343 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Ranaldo, A.: Intraday market liquidity on the Swiss stock exchange. Financ. Mark. Portf. Manag. 15, 309–327 (2001) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ranaldo, A.: Transaction costs on the Swiss stock exchange. Financ. Mark. Portf. Manag. 16, 53–68 (2002) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Shkilko, A.V., Van Ness, B.F., Van Ness, R.A.: Locked and crossed markets on Nasdaq and the NYSE. J. Financ. Mark. (2006, forthcoming) Google Scholar
  45. Simaan, Y., Weaver, D., Whitcomb, D.: The quotation behavior of ECNs and Nasdaq market makers. J. Finance 58, 1247–1267 (2003) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Stoll, H.R.: Electronic trading in stock markets. Working paper, Vanderbilt University (2005) Google Scholar
  47. Sussman, A.: Trends and opinions on algorithmic trading. Tabb Group Research Report (2005) Google Scholar
  48. The Economist: Stock exchanges: a war on two fronts. November 18, pp. 72–76 (2006) Google Scholar
  49. Weston, J.: Competition on the Nasdaq and the impact of recent market reforms. J. Finance 55, 2565–2598 (2000) CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.CentER-Tilburg University, TILEC, and European Banking CenterTilburgThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations