Payment for Order Flow and Asset Choice

57 Pages Posted: 28 Mar 2022 Last revised: 14 Apr 2023

See all articles by Thomas Ernst

Thomas Ernst

University of Maryland - Robert H Smith School of Business

Chester Spatt

Carnegie Mellon University

Multiple version iconThere are 2 versions of this paper

Date Written: March 2022

Abstract

The paper documents important differences in payment for order flow (PFOF), spreads, and price improvement across asset classes. In stocks we show that PFOF is small. While many retail trades are executed off-exchange, we find that they receive meaningful price improvement, particularly when spreads are at their minimum. In single-name equity options, we show that PFOF is large. While all option trades are executed on-exchange, option exchanges have rules that facilitate internalization. We exploit variation in the Designated Market Maker (DMM) assignments at option exchanges to show that retail traders receive less price improvement, and worse prices, from those DMMs who pay PFOF to brokers. Current debate concerning PFOF has focused on equity routing. We show that option routing is comparatively worse, and this gives rise to a second potential conflict of interest of brokers: encouraging customers to trade assets offering higher PFOF. As fintech has eliminated retail commissions, these cross-asset differences in PFOF have become far more consequential to broker incentives.

Suggested Citation

Ernst, Thomas and Spatt, Chester, Payment for Order Flow and Asset Choice (March 2022). NBER Working Paper No. w29883, Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4068065

Thomas Ernst (Contact Author)

University of Maryland - Robert H Smith School of Business ( email )

Robert H. Smith School of Business
Van Munching Hall
College Park, MD 20742
United States

Chester Spatt

Carnegie Mellon University

Pittsburgh, PA 15213-3890
United States

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics

Downloads
28
Abstract Views
627
PlumX Metrics