IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jfutmk/v24y2004i4p337-357.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The index futures markets: Is screen trading more efficient?

Author

Listed:
  • Laurence Copeland
  • Kin Lam
  • Sally‐Ann Jones

Abstract

This article uses a nonparametric test based on the arc‐sine law (see, e.g., Feller, 1965 ), which involves comparing the theoretical distribution implied by an intraday random walk with the empirical frequency distribution of the daily high/low times, in order to address the question of whether the abandonment of pit trading has been associated with greater market efficiency. If market inefficiencies result from flaws in the market microstructure of pit trading, they ought to have been eliminated by the introduction of screen trading. If, on the other hand, the inefficiencies are a reflection of investor psychology, they are likely to have survived, unaffected by the changeover. We focus here on four cases. Both the FTSE‐100 and CAC‐40 index futures contracts were originally traded by open outcry and have moved over to electronic trading in recent years, so that we are able to compare pricing behavior before and after the changeover. The equivalent contracts in Germany and Korea, on the other hand, have been traded electronically ever since their inception. Our results overwhelmingly reject the random‐walk hypothesis both for open‐outcry and electronic‐trading data sets, suggesting there has been no increase in efficiency as a result of the introduction of screen trading. One possible explanation consistent with our results would be that the index futures market is characterized by intraday overreaction. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 24:337–357, 2004

Suggested Citation

  • Laurence Copeland & Kin Lam & Sally‐Ann Jones, 2004. "The index futures markets: Is screen trading more efficient?," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(4), pages 337-357, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jfutmk:v:24:y:2004:i:4:p:337-357
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Stuart Snaith & Neil M. Kellard & Norzalina Ahmad, 2018. "Open outcry versus electronic trading: Tests of market efficiency on crude palm oil futures," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(6), pages 673-695, June.
    2. Valeria Martinez & Paramita Gupta & Yiuman Tse & Jullavut Kittiakarasakun, 2011. "Electronic versus open outcry trading in agricultural commodities futures markets," Review of Financial Economics, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 20(1), pages 28-36, January.
    3. Atilgan, Yigit & Demirtas, K. Ozgur & Simsek, Koray D., 2016. "Derivative markets in emerging economies: A survey," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 88-102.
    4. Christopher L. Gilbert & Herbert A. Rijken, 2006. "How is Futures Trading Affected by the Move to a Computerized Trading System? Lessons from the LIFFE FTSE 100 Contract," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 33(7‐8), pages 1267-1297, September.

    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:wly:jfutmk:v:24:y:2004:i:4:p:337-357. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.interscience.wiley.com/jpages/0270-7314/ .

    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.