IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2307.13772.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fragmentation and optimal liquidity supply on decentralized exchanges

Author

Listed:
  • Alfred Lehar
  • Christine Parlour
  • Marius Zoican

Abstract

We investigate how liquidity providers (LPs) choose between high- and low-fee trading venues, in the face of a fixed common gas cost. Analyzing Uniswap data, we find that high-fee pools attract 58% of liquidity supply yet execute only 21% of volume. Large LPs dominate low-fee pools, frequently adjusting out-of-range positions in response to informed order flow. In contrast, small LPs converge to high-fee pools, accepting lower execution probabilities to mitigate adverse selection and liquidity management costs. Fragmented liquidity dominates a single-fee market, as it encourages more liquidity providers to enter the market, while fostering LP competition on the low-fee pool.

Suggested Citation

  • Alfred Lehar & Christine Parlour & Marius Zoican, 2023. "Fragmentation and optimal liquidity supply on decentralized exchanges," Papers 2307.13772, arXiv.org, revised May 2024.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2307.13772
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2307.13772
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hasbrouck, Joel, 1991. "Measuring the Information Content of Stock Trades," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(1), pages 179-207, March.
    2. Thierry Foucault & Ohad Kadan & Eugene Kandel, 2013. "Liquidity Cycles and Make/Take Fees in Electronic Markets," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 68(1), pages 299-341, February.
    3. Thierry Foucault & Albert J. Menkveld, 2008. "Competition for Order Flow and Smart Order Routing Systems," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(1), pages 119-158, February.
    4. Robert Battalio & Shane A. Corwin & Robert Jennings, 2016. "Can Brokers Have It All? On the Relation between Make-Take Fees and Limit Order Execution Quality," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 71(5), pages 2193-2238, October.
    5. O'Hara, Maureen & Ye, Mao, 2011. "Is market fragmentation harming market quality?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(3), pages 459-474, June.
    6. Marco Pagano, 1989. "Trading Volume and Asset Liquidity," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 104(2), pages 255-274.
    7. Brolley, Michael & Cimon, David A., 2020. "Order-Flow Segmentation, Liquidity, and Price Discovery: The Role of Latency Delays," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(8), pages 2555-2587, December.
    8. Katz, Michael L & Shapiro, Carl, 1985. "Network Externalities, Competition, and Compatibility," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 424-440, June.
    9. Aspris, Angelo & Foley, Sean & Svec, Jiri & Wang, Leqi, 2021. "Decentralized exchanges: The “wild west” of cryptocurrency trading," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    10. Cimon, David A., 2021. "Broker routing decisions in limit order markets," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    11. Lioba Heimbach & Eric Schertenleib & Roger Wattenhofer, 2022. "Risks and Returns of Uniswap V3 Liquidity Providers," Papers 2205.08904, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2022.
    12. Sassan Alizadeh & Michael W. Brandt & Francis X. Diebold, 2002. "Range‐Based Estimation of Stochastic Volatility Models," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(3), pages 1047-1091, June.
    13. Basile Caparros & Amit Chaudhary & Olga Klein, 2023. "Blockchain scaling and liquidity concentration on decentralized exchanges," Papers 2306.17742, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    14. Agostino Capponi & Ruizhe Jia, 2021. "The Adoption of Blockchain-based Decentralized Exchanges," Papers 2103.08842, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2021.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Suchismita Mishra & Le Zhao, 2021. "Order Routing Decisions for a Fragmented Market: A Review," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-32, November.
    2. Comerton-Forde, Carole & Grégoire, Vincent & Zhong, Zhuo, 2019. "Inverted fee structures, tick size, and market quality," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 141-164.
    3. Peter Gomber & Satchit Sagade & Erik Theissen & Moritz Christian Weber & Christian Westheide, 2017. "Competition Between Equity Markets: A Review Of The Consolidation Versus Fragmentation Debate," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 792-814, July.
    4. Watson, Ethan D. & Woods, Donovan, 2022. "Exchange introduction and market competition: The entrance of MEMX and MIAX," Global Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 54(C).
    5. Nicholas Hirschey, 2021. "Do High-Frequency Traders Anticipate Buying and Selling Pressure?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(6), pages 3321-3345, June.
    6. Sean Foley & Tom G Meling & Bernt Arne Ødegaard, 2023. "Tick Size Wars: The Market Quality Effects of Pricing Grid Competition," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 27(2), pages 659-692.
    7. Markus Baldauf & Joshua Mollner, 2020. "High‐Frequency Trading and Market Performance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 75(3), pages 1495-1526, June.
    8. Kei Kawakami, 2013. "Optimal Market Size," Department of Economics - Working Papers Series 1168, The University of Melbourne.
    9. Jurich, Stephen N., 2021. "Does off-exchange trading decrease in the presence of uncertainty?," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 201-213.
    10. Anderson, Lisa & Andrews, Emad & Devani, Baiju & Mueller, Michael & Walton, Adrian, 2022. "Speed segmentation on exchanges: Competition for slow flow," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    11. Conrad, Jennifer & Wahal, Sunil, 2020. "The term structure of liquidity provision," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(1), pages 239-259.
    12. Brolley, Michael & Cimon, David A., 2020. "Order-Flow Segmentation, Liquidity, and Price Discovery: The Role of Latency Delays," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 55(8), pages 2555-2587, December.
    13. Aitken, Michael & Chen, Haoming & Foley, Sean, 2017. "The impact of fragmentation, exchange fees and liquidity provision on market quality," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 140-160.
    14. Cantillon, Estelle & Yin, Pai-Ling, 2011. "Competition between exchanges: A research agenda," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 29(3), pages 329-336, May.
    15. Carole Gresse, 2013. "Effects of Lit and Dark Trading Venue Competition on Liquidity : The MiFID Experience," Post-Print hal-01632517, HAL.
    16. Oliver Linton & Soheil Mahmoodzadeh, 2018. "Implications of High-Frequency Trading for Security Markets," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 237-259, August.
    17. Gomber, Peter & Sagade, Satchit & Theissen, Erik & Weber, Moritz Christian & Westheide, Christian, 2016. "Spoilt for choice: Order routing decisions in fragmented equity markets," CFR Working Papers 16-04, University of Cologne, Centre for Financial Research (CFR).
    18. Corey Garriott & Anna Pomeranets & Joshua Slive & Thomas Thorn, 2013. "Fragmentation in Canadian Equity Markets," Bank of Canada Review, Bank of Canada, vol. 2013(Autumn), pages 20-29.
    19. Hans Degryse & Frank de Jong & Vincent van Kervel, 2015. "The Impact of Dark Trading and Visible Fragmentation on Market Quality," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 19(4), pages 1587-1622.
    20. Sabrina Buti & Barbara Rindi & Ingrid M. Werner, 2014. "Dark Pool Trading Strategies, Market Quality and Welfare," Working Papers 530, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:2307.13772. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.