The Tradeoff between Discrete Pricing and Discrete Quantities: Evidence from U.S.-listed Firms

Sida Li, Mao Ye
{"title":"The Tradeoff between Discrete Pricing and Discrete Quantities: Evidence from U.S.-listed Firms","authors":"Sida Li, Mao Ye","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3763516","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Economists usually assume that price and quantity are continuous variables, while most market designs, in reality, impose discrete tick and lot sizes. We study a firm’s trade-off between these two discretenesses in U.S. stock exchanges, which mandate a one-cent minimum tick size and a 100-share minimum lot size. A uniform tick size favors high prices because the bid–ask spread cannot be lower than one cent. A uniform lot size favors low prices because low prices reduce adverse selection costs for market makers when they have to display at least 100 shares. We predict that a firm achieves its optimal price when its bid–ask spread is two ticks wide, when the marginal contribution from discrete prices equals that from discrete lots. Empirically, we find that stock splits improve liquidity when they move the bid–ask spread towards two ticks; otherwise, they reduce liquidity. Liquidity improvements contribute 95 bps to the average total return on a split announcement of 272 bps. Optimal pricing can increase the median U.S. stock value by 69 bps and total U.S. market capitalization by $54.9 billion.","PeriodicalId":321987,"journal":{"name":"ERN: Pricing (Topic)","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ERN: Pricing (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3763516","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Economists usually assume that price and quantity are continuous variables, while most market designs, in reality, impose discrete tick and lot sizes. We study a firm’s trade-off between these two discretenesses in U.S. stock exchanges, which mandate a one-cent minimum tick size and a 100-share minimum lot size. A uniform tick size favors high prices because the bid–ask spread cannot be lower than one cent. A uniform lot size favors low prices because low prices reduce adverse selection costs for market makers when they have to display at least 100 shares. We predict that a firm achieves its optimal price when its bid–ask spread is two ticks wide, when the marginal contribution from discrete prices equals that from discrete lots. Empirically, we find that stock splits improve liquidity when they move the bid–ask spread towards two ticks; otherwise, they reduce liquidity. Liquidity improvements contribute 95 bps to the average total return on a split announcement of 272 bps. Optimal pricing can increase the median U.S. stock value by 69 bps and total U.S. market capitalization by $54.9 billion.
离散定价与离散数量之间的权衡:来自美国上市公司的证据
经济学家通常认为价格和数量是连续变量,而实际上,大多数市场设计都是离散的tick和lot大小。我们研究了一家公司在美国证券交易所的这两种不确定性之间的权衡,这两种不确定性规定了1美分的最小交易规模和100股的最小交易规模。统一的交易点数有利于高价格,因为买卖价差不能低于1美分。统一的手数有利于低价格,因为当做市商必须展示至少100股股票时,低价格降低了他们的逆向选择成本。我们预测,当买卖价差为两个价差时,当离散价格的边际贡献等于离散手的边际贡献时,公司达到最优价格。实证研究发现,当股票分割使买卖价差向两个波动点移动时,股票分割改善了流动性;否则,它们会减少流动性。在拆分公告272个基点的平均总回报率中,流动性改善贡献了95个基点。最优定价可以使美国股票价值中位数增加69个基点,使美国总市值增加549亿美元。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信