IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/quantf/v15y2015i10p1737-1758.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Liquidity commonality does not imply liquidity resilience commonality: a functional characterisation for ultra-high frequency cross-sectional LOB data

Author

Listed:
  • Efstathios Panayi
  • Gareth W. Peters
  • Ioannis Kosmidis

Abstract

We present a large-scale study of commonality in liquidity and resilience across assets in an ultra high-frequency (millisecond-timestamped) Limit Order Book (LOB) data-set from a pan-European electronic equity trading facility. We first show that extant work in quantifying liquidity commonality through the degree of explanatory power of the dominant modes of variation of liquidity (extracted through Principal Component Analysis) fails to account for heavy-tailed features in the data, thus producing potentially misleading results. We employ Independent Component Analysis, which both decorrelates the liquidity measures in the asset cross section, but also reduces higher order statistical dependencies. To measure commonality in liquidity resilience, we utilise a novel characterisation proposed by Panayi et al. [Market resilience, 2014] for the time required for return to a threshold liquidity level. This reflects a dimension of liquidity that is not captured by the majority of liquidity measures and has important ramifications for understanding supply and demand pressures for market makers in electronic exchanges, as well as regulators and HFTs. When the metric is mapped out across a range of thresholds, it produces the daily Liquidity Resilience Profile for a given asset. This daily summary of liquidity resilience behaviour from the vast LOB data-set is then amenable to a functional data representation. This enables the comparison of liquidity resilience in the asset cross section via functional linear sub-space decompositions and functional regression. The functional regression results presented here suggest that market factors for liquidity resilience (as extracted through functional principal components analysis) can explain between 10 and 40% of the variation in liquidity resilience at low liquidity thresholds, but are less explanatory at more extreme levels, where individual asset factors take effect.

Suggested Citation

  • Efstathios Panayi & Gareth W. Peters & Ioannis Kosmidis, 2015. "Liquidity commonality does not imply liquidity resilience commonality: a functional characterisation for ultra-high frequency cross-sectional LOB data," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(10), pages 1737-1758, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:quantf:v:15:y:2015:i:10:p:1737-1758
    DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2015.1071075
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14697688.2015.1071075
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14697688.2015.1071075?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nina Karnaukh & Angelo Ranaldo & Paul Söderlind, 2015. "Understanding FX Liquidity," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 28(11), pages 3073-3108.
    2. Craig W. Holden & Stacey Jacobsen & Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, 2014. "The Empirical Analysis of Liquidity," Foundations and Trends(R) in Finance, now publishers, vol. 8(4), pages 263-365, December.
    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. Panayi, Efstathios & Peters, Gareth W. & Danielsson, Jon & Zigrand, Jean-Pierre, 2018. "Designating market maker behaviour in limit order book markets," Econometrics and Statistics, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 20-44.
    2. Pelizzon, Loriana & Sagade, Satchit & Vozian, Katia, 2020. "Resiliency: Cross-venue dynamics with Hawkes processes," SAFE Working Paper Series 291, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.

    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. Efstathios Panayi & Gareth Peters & Ioannis Kosmidis, 2014. "Liquidity commonality does not imply liquidity resilience commonality: A functional characterisation for ultra-high frequency cross-sectional LOB data," Papers 1406.5486, arXiv.org.
    2. Klova, Valeriia & Odegaard, Bernt Arne, 2018. "Equity trading costs have fallen less than commonly thought. Evidence using alternative trading cost estimators," UiS Working Papers in Economics and Finance 2018/4, University of Stavanger, revised 2019.
    3. Gniadkowska-Szymańska Agata, 2017. "The impact of trading liquidity on the rate of return on emerging markets: the example of Poland and the Baltic countries," Financial Internet Quarterly (formerly e-Finanse), Sciendo, vol. 13(4), pages 136-148, December.
    4. Chen, Yu-Lun & Mo, Wan-Shin, 2023. "Determinants and dynamic interactions of trader positions in the gold futures market," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 31(C).
    5. Serdengeçti, Süleyman & Sensoy, Ahmet & Nguyen, Duc Khuong, 2021. "Dynamics of return and liquidity (co) jumps in emerging foreign exchange markets," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 73(C).
    6. Aleksejs Krecetovs & Pasquale Della Corte, 2016. "Macro uncertainty and currency premia," 2016 Meeting Papers 624, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    7. Jakree Koosakul & Ilhyock Shim, 2017. "The beneficial aspect of FX volatility for market liquidity," BIS Working Papers 629, Bank for International Settlements.
    8. O’Hara, Maureen, 2015. "High frequency market microstructure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(2), pages 257-270.
    9. Chen, Jiayuan & Gong, Di & Muckley, Cal, 2020. "Stock market illiquidity, bargaining power and the cost of borrowing," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 181-206.
    10. Black, Jeffrey R. & Stock, Duane & Yadav, Pradeep K., 2016. "The pricing of different dimensions of liquidity: Evidence from government guaranteed bonds," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 119-132.
    11. Chiara Banti, 2016. "Illiquidity In The Stock And Foreign Exchange Markets: An Investigation Of Their Cross-Market Dynamics," Journal of Financial Research, Southern Finance Association;Southwestern Finance Association, vol. 39(4), pages 411-436, December.
    12. Michael Moore & Andreas Schrimpf & Vladyslav Sushko, 2016. "Downsized FX markets: causes and implications," BIS Quarterly Review, Bank for International Settlements, December.
    13. Fu, Fanjie & Fang, Jing & Yang, Mei & Yao, Shujie, 2024. "Institutional investor horizons and stock price crash risk," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 72(PA).
    14. Chang, Ya-Ting & Gau, Yin-Feng & Hsu, Chih-Chiang, 2022. "Liquidity spillover in foreign exchange markets," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 44(C).
    15. Arash Aloosh & Geert Bekaert, 2022. "Currency Factors," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 4042-4064, June.
    16. Jurksas Linas, 2018. "What Factors Shape the Liquidity Levels of Euro Area Sovereign Bonds?," Open Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 1(1), pages 154-166, December.
    17. Abankwa, Samuel & Blenman, Lloyd P., 2021. "Measuring liquidity risk effects on carry trades across currencies and regimes," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 60(C).
    18. Albrecht, Peter & Kočenda, Evžen, 2024. "Volatility connectedness on the central European forex markets," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    19. Harald Hau & Peter Hoffmann & Sam Langfield & Yannick Timmer, 2021. "Discriminatory Pricing of Over-the-Counter Derivatives," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(11), pages 6660-6677, November.
    20. Fabisik, Kornelia & Fahlenbrach, Rüdiger & Stulz, René M. & Taillard, Jérôme P., 2021. "Why are firms with more managerial ownership worth less?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(3), pages 699-725.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:quantf:v:15:y:2015:i:10:p:1737-1758. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RQUF20 .

    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.