Skip Navigation


RFS Advance Access originally published online on June 28, 2007
Review of Financial Studies 2007 20(5):1707-1747; doi:10.1093/rfs/hhm027
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/5/1707    most recent
hhm027v2
hhm027v1
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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Foucault, T.
Right arrow Articles by Theissen, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Related Collections
Right arrow G10 - General
Right arrow G14 - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies
Right arrow G24 - Investment Banking; Venture Capital; Brokerage
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Copyright © The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies.

Does Anonymity Matter in Electronic Limit Order Markets?

Thierry Foucault
HEC School of Management

Sophie Moinas
Université de Toulouse

Erik Theissen
Bonn University and Centre for Financial Research, Cologne

Address correspondence to Thierry Foucault, HEC School of Management, Paris, 1 rue de la Libération, 78351, Jouy en Josas, France, or e-mail: foucault{at}hec.fr

JEL: G10, G14, G24


   Abstract

We develop a model in which limit order traders possess volatility information. We show that in this case the size of the bid–ask spread is informative about future volatility. Moreover, if volatility information is in part private, we establish that (i) the size of the bid–ask spread and (ii) its informativeness about future volatility should change in the same direction when limit order traders' identifiers stop being disclosed. We test these predictions using data from the Paris Bourse. As expected, we find that the average quoted spread and its informativeness are significantly smaller when limit order traders' identifiers are concealed. These findings suggest that the limit order book is a channel for volatility information.


We are grateful to the editor (Maureen O'Hara) and an anonymous referee for providing suggestions that greatly improved the paper. We also thank James Angel, Bruno Biais, Peter Bossaerts, David Brown, Cecilia Caglio, Fany Declerk, Gabrielle Demange, Joachim Grammig, Maria Kasch, Dima Leschinskii, Stefano Lovo, Richard Lyons, Frank deJong, Frédéric Palomino, Chester Spatt, Barbara Rindi, Richard Roll, Gideon Saar, Duane Seppi, Avi Whol and participants in various conferences (EFA, WFA, AFFI, INSEAD market microstructure workshop, the 6th ESC Toulouse-IDEI Finance Workshop, Oxford Symposium) and seminars (Bielefeld University, CORE, Frankfurt University, Duisburg University, HEC Montreal, Norwegian School of Business, University of Amsterdam, University of Rotterdam, Tilburg University and Séminaire Bachelier) for helpful comments. We thank Euronext Paris for providing the data. Financial support from the Fondation HEC and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft through SFB/TR 15 is gratefully acknowledged.

The JEL line has been updated.


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.