Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-25T19:45:45.021Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Consolidation, Fragmentation, and Market Performance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Haim Mendelson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper studies the impact of market consolidation or fragmentation on its performance, examining four alternative models of exchange: a consolidated clearing house, fragmented clearing houses, a monopoly dealer market, and an interdealer market. The effects of the market mechanism on the expected quantity traded, the price variance faced by individual traders, the quality of market price signals, the expected gains from trade, and the exchange implementation costs are studied.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 22 , Issue 2 , June 1987 , pp. 189 - 207
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1987

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.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Amihud, Y., and Mendelson, H.. “Dealership Market: Market-Making with Inventory.” Journal of Financial Economics, 8 (03 1980), 31–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Amihud, Y., and Mendelson, H.. “Asset Price Behavior in a Dealership Market.” Financial Analysts Journal, 38 (05–06 1982), 50–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Amihud, Y., and Mendelson, H.. “An Integrated Computerized Trading System.” In Market Making and the Changing Structure of the Securities Industry. Lexington, MA: Heath (1985), 217–236.Google Scholar
[4]Amihud, Y., and Mendelson, H.. “Asset Pricing and the Bid-Ask Spread.” Journal of Financial Economics, 17 (12 1986), 223–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Amihud, Y., and Mendelson, H.. “Liquidity and Stock Returns.” Financial Analysts Journal, 42 (05–06 1986), 43–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Bagehot, W. “The Only Game in Town.” Financial Analysts Journal, 27 (03–04 1971), 12–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Benston, G. J., and Hagerman, R.. “Determinants of Bid-Ask Spreads in the Over-the-Counter Market.” Journal of Financial Economics, 1 (12 1974), 353–364.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Branch, B., and Freed, W.. “Bid-Asked Spreads on the Amex and the Big Board.” The Journal of Finance, 32 (03 1977), 159–163.Google Scholar
[9]Cohen, K. J.; Maier, S. F.; Schwartz, R. A.; and Whitcomb, D. K.. “An Analysis of the Economic Justification for Consolidation in a Secondary Security Market.” Journal of Banking and Finance, 6 (03 1982), 117–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Davis, J. L. “The Intermarket Trading System and the Cincinnati Experiment.” In Market Making and the Changing Structure of the Securities Industry. Lexington, MA: Heath (1985), 269–284.Google Scholar
[11]Garbade, K. D.Securities Markets. New York: McGraw-Hill (1982).Google Scholar
[12]Garbade, K. D., and Silber, W. L.. “Price Dispersion in the Government Securities Market.” Journal of Political Economy, 84 (08 1976), 721–740.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Garbade, K. D., and Silber, W. L.. “Technology, Communication and the Performance of Financial Markets: 1840–1978.” Journal of Finance, 33 (06 1978), 819–832.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Garbade, K. D., and Silber, W. L.. “Dominant and Satellite Markets: A Study of Dually-traded Securities.” The Review of Economics and Statistics, 61 (08 1979), 455–462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Garman, Mark B. “Market Microstructure.” Journal of Financial Economics, 3 (06 1976), 257–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Hamilton, James L. “Marketplace Fragmentation, Competition, and the Efficiency of the Stock Exchange.” The Journal of Finance, 34 (03 1979), 171–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[17]Ho, T., and Stoll, H. R.. “The Dynamics of Dealer Markets under Competition.” The Journal of Finance, 38 (09 1983), 1053–1074.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[18]Marshall, A.Principles of Economics, Eighth Edition. New York: The Macmillan Company (1949).Google Scholar
[19]Mendelson, H. “Market Behavior in a Clearing House.” Econometrica, 50 (11 1982), 1505–1524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[20]Mendelson, H. “Random Competitive Exchange: Price Distributions and Gains from Trade.” Journal of Economic Theory, 37 (12 1985), 254–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21]Mendelson, H. “Exchange with Random Quantities and Discrete Feasible Prices.” Working Paper, Grad. School of Management, Univ. of Rochester, NY (1986).Google Scholar
[22]Parzen, E.Stochastic Processes. San Francisco: Holden-Day (1962).Google Scholar
[23]Ross, S. M.Applied Probability Models with Optimization Applications. San Francisco: Holden-Day (1970).Google Scholar
[24]Securities and Exchange Commission. A Monitoring Report on the Operation of the Intermarket Trading System: 1978–1981. Washington, D.C.: SEC Directorate of Economic and Policy Analysis (06 1982).Google Scholar
[25]Stoll, H. Comments on “An Analysis of the Economic Justification for Consolidation in a Secondary Security Market.” Journal of Banking and Finance, 6 (03 1982), 137–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[26]Vickery, W. “Counterspeculation, Auctions, and Competitive Sealed Tenders.” The Journal of Finance, 16 (03 1961), 8–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[27]Whitcomb, D. K. “An International Comparison of Stock Exchange Trading Structures.” In Market Making and the Changing Structure of the Securities Industry. Lexington, MA: Heath (1985), 237–255.Google Scholar