Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (18)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Naranjo, A.
Right arrow Articles by Nimalendran, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Rev Fin 2000; 13:453-477
© 2000 the Society for Financial Studies

Article

Government intervention and adverse selection costs in foreign exchange markets

A Naranjo and M Nimalendranz
University of Florida, Warrington College of Business, Department of Finance, PO Box 117168, Gainesville, FL 32611-7168, USA
z Corresponding author

Abstract

An important group of traders in the foreign exchange market is governments who often adhere to a foreign exchange rate policy of occasional interventions with otherwise floating rates. In this article we provide a theoretical model and empirical evidence that government foreign exchange interventions create significant adverse selection problems for dealers. In particular, our model shows that the adverse selection component of the foreign exchange spread is positively related to the variance of unexpected intervention and that expected intervention has no impact on the spread. After controlling for inventory and order processing costs, we find that bid-ask spreads increase with U.S. dollar and German deutsche mark foreign exchange rate intervention during the period 1976-1994. Furthermore, when the intervention is decomposed into expected and unexpected components, we find a statistically and economically significant increase in spreads with the variance of unexpected intervention, while expected intervention has no significant impact on spreads.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.