IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/enejou/v45y2024i1p231-256.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Frequent Auctions for Intraday Electricity Markets

Author

Listed:
  • Christoph Graf
  • Thomas Kuppelwieser
  • David Wozabal

Abstract

Continuous trading is currently becoming the standard for intraday electricity markets. In this paper, we propose frequent auctions as a viable alternative. We argue that batching orders in auctions potentially leads to lower liquidity cost, more reliable, less noisy price signals, and allows for better alignment of market outcomes with the technical realities of the transmission grid. In an empirical study, we compare the German continuous intraday market with counterfactual outcomes from frequent auctions. We find that traded volumes tend to be higher for continuous trading; however, the auction market benefits from lower liquidity costs and less noisy price signals. Furthermore, we critically discuss the suitability of continuous trading in the presence of network constraints and technical restrictions of conventional units. Taken together these findings suggest that in sparsely traded intraday markets, pooling orders in frequent auctions may be beneficial.

Suggested Citation

  • Christoph Graf & Thomas Kuppelwieser & David Wozabal, 2024. "Frequent Auctions for Intraday Electricity Markets," The Energy Journal, , vol. 45(1), pages 231-256, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:45:y:2024:i:1:p:231-256
    DOI: 10.5547/01956574.45.1.cgra
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.5547/01956574.45.1.cgra
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5547/01956574.45.1.cgra?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Simon Hagemann & Christoph Weber, 2013. "An Empirical Analysis of Liquidity and its Determinants in The German Intraday Market for Electricity," EWL Working Papers 1317, University of Duisburg-Essen, Chair for Management Science and Energy Economics, revised Oct 2013.
    2. Eicke, Anselm & Ruhnau, Oliver & Hirth, Lion, 2021. "Electricity balancing as a market equilibrium: An instrument-based estimation of supply and demand for imbalance energy," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 102(C).
    3. Lauterbach, Beni, 2001. "A note on trading mechanism and securities' value: The analysis of rejects from continuous trade," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(2), pages 419-430, February.
    4. Chelley-Steeley, Patricia, 2009. "Price synchronicity: The closing call auction and the London stock market," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 19(5), pages 777-791, December.
    5. Eric Budish & Peter Cramton & John Shim, 2015. "Editor's Choice The High-Frequency Trading Arms Race: Frequent Batch Auctions as a Market Design Response," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 130(4), pages 1547-1621.
    6. Muscarella, Chris J. & Piwowar, Michael S., 2001. "Market microstructure and securities values: : Evidence from the Paris Bourse," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 4(3), pages 209-229, June.
    7. Rainer Baule & Michael Naumann, 2021. "Volatility and Dispersion of Hourly Electricity Contracts on the German Continuous Intraday Market," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-24, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Holmberg, Pär, 2024. "The Inc-Dec Game and How to Mitigate It," Working Paper Series 1512, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jiayi Li & Sumei Luo & Guangyou Zhou, 2021. "Call auction, continuous trading and closing price formation," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(6), pages 1037-1065, June.
    2. Twu, Mia & Wang, Jianxin, 2018. "Call auction frequency and market quality: Evidence from the Taiwan Stock Exchange," Journal of Asian Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 53-62.
    3. Ya‐Kai Chang & Robin K. Chou & J. Jimmy Yang, 2020. "A rare move: The effects of switching from a closing call auction to a continuous trading," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(3), pages 308-328, March.
    4. Comerton-Forde, Carole & Rydge, James, 2006. "The influence of call auction algorithm rules on market efficiency," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 9(2), pages 199-222, May.
    5. David Rushing Dewhurst & Michael Vincent Arnold & Colin Michael Van Oort, 2018. "Selection mechanisms affect volatility in evolving markets," Papers 1812.05657, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2019.
    6. Ravi Jagannathan, 2022. "On Frequent Batch Auctions for Stocks [Tail Expectation and Imperfect Competition in Limit Order Book Markets]," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(1), pages 1-17.
    7. Alangi, Somayeh Rahimi & Bjørndal, Endre & Bjørndal, Mette, 2022. "Can the European intraday market be designed as a congestion management tool?," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    8. Chang, Rosita P. & Rhee, S. Ghon & Stone, Gregory R. & Tang, Ning, 2008. "How does the call market method affect price efficiency? Evidence from the Singapore Stock Market," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 2205-2219, October.
    9. Zhang, Zeyu & Ibikunle, Gbenga, 2023. "The market quality effects of sub-second frequent batch auctions: Evidence from dark trading restrictions," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    10. Sioud Olfa Benouda & Mezzez Hmaied Dorra, 2003. "The Effects of Automation on Liquidity, Volatility, Stock Returns and Efficiency: Evidence from the Tunisian Stock Market," Review of Middle East Economics and Finance, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 43-56, August.
    11. Avner Kalay & Li Wei & Avi Wohl, 2002. "Continuous Trading or Call Auctions: Revealed Preferences of Investors at the Tel Aviv Stock Exchange," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(1), pages 523-542, February.
    12. Weiyu Kuo & Yu‐Ching Li, 2011. "Trading Mechanisms and Market Quality: Call Markets versus Continuous Auction Markets," International Review of Finance, International Review of Finance Ltd., vol. 11(4), pages 417-444, December.
    13. Andrea Attar & Thomas Mariotti & François Salanié, 2021. "Entry-Proofness and Discriminatory Pricing under Adverse Selection," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(8), pages 2623-2659, August.
    14. Jason Allen & Milena Wittwer, 2023. "Centralizing Over-the-Counter Markets?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 131(12), pages 3310-3351.
    15. Scott Duke Kominers & Alexander Teytelboym & Vincent P Crawford, 2017. "An invitation to market design," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 33(4), pages 541-571.
    16. Bellia, Mario & Christensen, Kim & Kolokolov, Aleksey & Pelizzon, Loriana & Renò, Roberto, 2022. "Do designated market makers provide liquidity during a flash crash?," SAFE Working Paper Series 270, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2022.
    17. Czupryna Marcin & Oleksy Paweł, 2018. "The Effect of an Electronic Exchange on Prices and Return Volatility in the Fine Wine Market," Financial Internet Quarterly (formerly e-Finanse), Sciendo, vol. 14(4), pages 22-35, December.
    18. Eduard Hartwich & Alexander Rieger & Johannes Sedlmeir & Dominik Jurek & Gilbert Fridgen, 2023. "Machine economies," Electronic Markets, Springer;IIM University of St. Gallen, vol. 33(1), pages 1-13, December.
    19. Chelley-Steeley, Patricia L., 2008. "Market quality changes in the London Stock Market," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(10), pages 2248-2253, October.
    20. Saggese, Pietro & Belmonte, Alessandro & Dimitri, Nicola & Facchini, Angelo & Böhme, Rainer, 2023. "Arbitrageurs in the Bitcoin ecosystem: Evidence from user-level trading patterns in the Mt. Gox exchange platform," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 251-270.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:enejou:v:45:y:2024:i:1:p:231-256. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.