淡江大學覺生紀念圖書館 (TKU Library)
進階搜尋


下載電子全文限經由淡江IP使用) 
系統識別號 U0002-2905200523522800
中文論文名稱 檔次變更對買賣價差與組成份之探討
英文論文名稱 How Tick Size Affects Bid/Ask Spread and Components
校院名稱 淡江大學
系所名稱(中) 財務金融學系碩士班
系所名稱(英) Department of Banking and Finance
學年度 93
學期 2
出版年 94
研究生中文姓名 顏瑜儀
研究生英文姓名 Yu-Yi Yen
學號 692490690
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
口試日期 2005-05-23
論文頁數 69頁
口試委員 指導教授-林蒼祥
共同指導教授-段昌文
委員-梁國源
委員-龔尚智
委員-顧廣平
中文關鍵字 最小升降單位  買賣價差  委託單處理成本  存貨持有溢酬  ETFs 
英文關鍵字 Tick size  Bid/ask spread  Order processing costs  Inventory-holding premium  ETFs 
學科別分類 學科別社會科學商學
中文摘要 觀察市場微結構與造市者收益之公平性上,了解與評估造市者之買賣價差是必要的。本文主要觀察美國證券交易所 (AMEX) 於2001年1月29日變更最小升降單位前後之買賣價差與組成份,採用Bollen et al. (2004) 之價差評價模型,並以選擇權理論評估DIA與QQQ之價差組成份,最後探討調整檔次對價差與組成份之變化。實證發現,DIA與QQQ在最小升降單位縮小後,等權平均報價價差與有效價差皆有顯著的降低,意味著價差之競爭力提高並隱含投資者交易成本之下降;而對DIA與QQQ之成交量皆有顯著之提升,表示交易成本的減少,吸引更多投資人進場交易。其次,DIA與QQQ之委託單處理成本除了與買賣價差具有正向關係,在小數點報價後,亦因交易量的增加而減少,此可能由於造市時之固定成本下降所致。最後,以選擇權理論權量測預期存貨持有溢酬中發現,DIA之存貨持有溢酬愈高,價差愈大,QQQ之存貨持有溢酬與價差亦為正相關,然而事後不為顯著,此顯示可能同商品間的替代關係影響評估結果。而在事後檢定上皆有顯著的減少,表示小數點報價後,成交量的增加,除了提高市場流動性,並提升市場效率,因而使DIA與QQQ的存貨持有成本與逆選擇成本之和皆有明顯的下降。
英文摘要 To understanding and measuring the determinants of market maker bid/ask spreads is crucial in evaluating the merits of competing market structures and the fairness of market rents. We use the model of Bollen et al. (2004) to test how tick size affects bid/ask spread and components. The model of market makers accounts for the effects of price discreteness includes by order processing costs, inventory-holding costs and adverse selection. The inventory-holding and adverse selection cost components of spread are modeled as an option with stochastic time to expiration. This inventory-holding premium embedded in the spread represents compensation for the price risk borne by the market maker while the security is held in inventory. The premium is partitioned in such a way that the inventory-holding and adverse cost components. After the tick size reduced, the equal-weighted quoted and effective spreads are significantly decreasing but trading volumes are apparently increasing. Besides, the order-processing costs of DIA and QQQ have significantly positive relation with their bid/ask spread, and the order-processing costs per share reduce due to increasing trading volumes. In addition, whether using in-the-money option or collar option to evaluate the inventory-holding premium, the inventory-holding premium also has significant reduction.
論文目次 目 錄
第一章 緒論 1
1-1 研究背景與動機 1
1-2 研究目的 3
1-3 研究架構 4
1-4 研究流程 6
第二章 文獻探討 7
2-1 買賣價差組成份 7
2-2 買賣價差組成份之實證 13
2-3 最小升降單位對買賣價差之影響 15
第三章 理論與模型 18
3-1 買賣價差之衡量 18
3-2 價差組成份之衡量 19
第四章 研究方法 25
4-1 波動性之衡量 25
4-2 價差估計 26
4-3 選擇權模擬 29
4-4 買賣價差之迴歸模型 31
第五章 實證結果與分析 35
5-1 資料 35
5-2 結構模型之實證結果 42
5-3 最小升降單位改變對買賣價差之影響 61
第六章 結論與建議 65
6-1 結論 65
6-2 研究限制與建議 66
參考文獻 67

表 目 錄
表5-1、DIA之基本統計量………………………………………………………..38
表5-2、QQQ之基本統計量………………………………………………………39
表5-3、DIA絕對報價價差與有效價差之迴歸模型分析……………..................44
表5-4、QQQ絕對報價價差與有效價差之迴歸模型分析………………………45
表5-5、DIA相對報價價差與有效價差之迴歸模型分析………………………..47
表5-6、QQQ相對報價價差與有效價差之迴歸模型分析………………………49
表5-7 DIA與QQQ存貨持有溢酬及其組成份之迴歸模型……………….......51
表5-8、DIA以collar評估預期存貨持有溢酬之絕對有效價差迴歸模型分析...53
表5-9、QQQ以collar評估預期存貨持有溢酬之絕對有效價差迴歸模型分析.54
表5-10、DIA以straddle評估逆選擇成本之絕對有效價差迴歸模型分析…….56
表5-11、QQQ以straddle評估逆選擇成本之絕對有效價差迴歸模型分析……57
表5-12、DIA與QQQ絕對有效價差之迴歸模型……………………………….59
表5-13、DIA與QQQ小數點報價前後之比較…………………………….……61
表5-14、DIA與QQQ小數點報價前後以collar評估預期存貨持有溢酬之比較…………………………………………………………………………62

圖 目 錄
圖5-1、研究期間……………………………………………………………………36
圖5-2、以價平選擇權評估DIA之預期存貨持有溢酬……………………………40
圖5-3、以價平選擇權評估QQQ之預期存貨持有溢酬….………………………41
圖5-4、以collar評估DIA之預期存貨持有溢酬…………………………………42
圖5-5、以collar評估QQQ之預期存貨持有溢酬………..………………………42
參考文獻 Ahn, H., Cao, C., and H. Choe, 1996, “Tick Size, Spread and Volume.” Journal of Financial Intermediation 5, 2-22.

Amihud, Y. and H. Mendelson, 1980, “Dealership Market: Market-Making with Inventory.” Journal of Financial Economics 8, 31-49..

Anshuman, V. and A. Kalay, 1998, “Market Making with Discrete Prices.” Review of Financial Economics 11(1), 81-109.

Bacidore, J., 1997, “The Impact of Decimalization on Market Quality: An Empirical Investigation of the Toronto Stock Exchange.” Journal of Financial Intermediation 6, 92-120.

Bagehot, W., 1971, “The Only Game in Town.” Financial Analysis Journal 27, 12-14.

Benston, G. and R. Hagerman, 1974, “Determinants of Bid-Ask Spreads in the Over-the-Counter Market.” Journal of Financial Economics 1, 353-364.

Bessembinder, H., 2000, “Tick Size, Spreads, and Liquidity: An Analysis of Nasdaq Securities Trading near Ten Dollars.” Journal of Financial Intermediation, 9, 213-239.

Black, F. and M. Scholes, 1973, “The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities.” Journal of Political Economy 81, 637-659.

Bollen, N. and R. Whaley, 1998, “Are “Teenies” Better.” Journal of Portfolio Management 25, 10-24.

Bollen, N., Smith, T., and R. Whaley, 2004, “Modeling the Bid/Ask Spread: Measuring the Inventory-Holding Premium.” Journal of Financial Economics 72, 97-141.

Branch, B. and W. Freed, 1977, “Bid-Ask Spreads on the AMEX and the Big Board.” Journal of Finance 32, 159-163.
Copeland, T. and D. Galai, 1983, “Information Effects on the Bid-Ask Spread.” Journal of Finance 38, 1457-1469.

Demsetz, H., 1968, “The Cost of Transacting.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 82, 33-53.
Easley, D. and M. O’Hara, 1987, “Price, Trade Size, and Information in Securities Markets.” Journal of Financial Economics 19, 69-90.

Easley, D., Kiefer, N., O’Hara, M. and J. Paperman, 1996, “Liquidity, Information, and Infrequently Traded Stocks.” The Journal of Finance 51, 1405-1437.

Garman, M., 1976, “Market Microstructure.” Journal of Financial Economics 3, 257-275.

Garman, T. and M. Klass, 1980, “On the Estimation of Security Price Volatilities from Historical Data.” Journal of Business, 53, 67-78.

Glosten, L. and L. Harries, 1988, “Estimating the Components of the Bid-ask Spread.” Journal of Financial Economics, 21, 123-142.

Glosten, L. and P. Milgrom, 1985, “Bid, Ask, and Transaction Prices in a Specialist Market with Heterogeneously Informed Traders.” Journal of Financial Economics 14, 71-100.

Harris, L., 1994, “Minimum Price Variations, Discrete Bid-Ask Spread, and Quotation Sizes.” Review of Financial Studies 7, 149-178.

Hasbrouck, J. and R. Schwartz, 1988, “Liquidity and Execution Costs in Equity Markets.” Journal of Portfolio Management 14, 10-16.

Huang, R. and H. Stoll, 1994, “Market Microstructure and Stock Return Predictions.” Review of Financial Studies 7, 179-213.

Laux, P., 1993, “Trade Size and Theories of the Bid-Ask Spread.” Journal of Financial Research 16, 237-249.

Lintner, J., 1965, “The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets.” Review of Economics and Statistics 47, 13-37.

Markowitz, H., 1952, “Portfolio Selection.” Journal of Finance 12, 77-91.

McInish, T. and R. Wood, 1992, “An Analysis of Intraday Patterns in Bid-Ask Spreads for NYSE Stocks.” Journal of Finance 47, 753-764.

Merton, R., 1973, “Theory of Rational Option Pricing.” Bell Journal of Economics and Management Science 4, 141-183.

Porter, D. and D. Weaver, 1997, “Tick Size and Market Quality.” Financial Management 26, 5-26.

Sharpe, W., 1964, “Capital Asset Prices: a Theory of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions of Risk.” Journal of Finance 19, 425-442.

Stoll, H., 1978a, “The Supply of Dealer Services in Security Market.” Journal of Finance 33, 1133-1151.

Stoll, H., 1978b, “The Pricing of Security Dealer Services: An Empirical Study of Nasdaq Stocks.” Journal of Finance, 1153-1172.
Stoll, H., 1989, “Inferring the Components of Bid/Ask Spread: Theory and Empirical Tests.” Journal of Finance 44, 115-134.
Tinic, S., 1972, “The Economics of Liquidity Services.” Quarterly Journal of Economics 86, 79-93.
Tinic, S. and R. West, 1972, “Competition and the Pricing of Dealer Services in the over-the-counter Market.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis 8, 1707-1727.
Tobin, J., 1958, “Liquidity Preference as Behavior towards Risk.” Review of Economic Studies 25, 65-86.
論文使用權限
  • 同意紙本無償授權給館內讀者為學術之目的重製使用,於2005-06-02公開。
  • 同意授權瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2005-06-02起公開。


  • 若您有任何疑問,請與我們聯絡!
    圖書館: 請來電 (02)2621-5656 轉 2281 或 來信