The MiFIR Trading Obligation: Impact on Trading Volume and Liquidity in Electronic Trading

The new financial market regulation MiFID II/MiFIR will fundamentally change the trading and market infrastructure landscape in Europe. One key aspect is the trading obligation for shares that intends to restrict over-the-counter (OTC) trading to ensure that more trading takes place on regulated trading venues and on platforms of Systematic Internalisers (SIs). In this context, market experts often argue that SIs might have a competitive advantage due to the best execution concept in combination with the possible exemption of SIs from the tick size regime. Applying scenario analysis, we determine the likely migration of OTC trading volume to regulated trading venues and SIs. Based on our data set, we investigate how changes in trading volume influence liquidity on open limit order book markets (lit markets). The results of our scenario analysis indicate that liquidity on lit markets might increase due to additional turnover formerly traded OTC. However, also a negative liquidity effect for lit markets and for the price discovery process is possible because of increased trading via SIs.

[1]  Richard Roll,et al.  Recent Trends in Trading Activity and Market Quality , 2010 .

[2]  Charles M. Jones,et al.  Does Algorithmic Trading Improve Liquidity? , 2010 .

[3]  A. Hirschman.  THE PATERNITY OF AN INDEX , 1964 .

[4]  Robert E. Verrecchia,et al.  Accounting Information, Disclosure, and the Cost of Capital , 2006 .

[5]  Hans Degryse,et al.  The Impact of Dark Trading and Visible Fragmentation on Market Quality , 2011 .

[6]  Ľuboš Pástor,et al.  Liquidity Risk and Expected Stock Returns , 2003, Journal of Political Economy.

[7]  Hans B. Christensen,et al.  Capital-Market Effects of Securities Regulation: Prior Conditions, Implementation, and Enforcement , 2011 .

[8]  E. Theissen,et al.  Liquidity Dynamics in an Electronic Open Limit Order Book: An Event Study Approach , 2015 .

[9]  Y. Amihud,et al.  Illiquidity and Stock Returns II: Cross-Section and Time-Series Effects , 2018, The Review of Financial Studies.

[10]  L. Pedersen,et al.  Asset Pricing with Liquidity Risk , 2003 .

[11]  Tarun Chordia,et al.  Co-Movements in Bid-Ask Spreads and Market Depth , 2000 .

[12]  E. Theissen,et al.  Spoilt for Choice: Order Routing Decisions in Fragmented Equity Markets , 2016 .

[13]  Theo J.B.M. Postma,et al.  How to improve scenario analysis as a strategic management tool , 2005 .

[14]  William R. Huss,et al.  A move toward scenario analysis , 1988 .

[15]  P. Gomber,et al.  The Impact of MiFID II/MiFIR on European Market Structure: A Survey among Market Experts , 2018 .

[16]  Martin Weber,et al.  A new method of scenario analysis for strategic planning , 1988 .

[17]  Peter Gomber,et al.  MiFID: Eine systematische Analyse der Zielerreichung , 2014 .

[18]  E. Theissen,et al.  The State of Play in European Over-the-Counter Equities Trading , 2015, The Journal of Trading.

[19]  P. Schoemaker.  Scenario Planning: A Tool for Strategic Thinking , 1995 .

[20]  M. Nimalendran,et al.  Market Evidence on the Opaqueness of Banking Firms' Assets , 2001 .

[22]  Carole Gresse,et al.  Effects of Lit and Dark Market Fragmentation on Liquidity , 2017 .