A block trade is a single large trade in excess of a specific volume and/or a specific market value. The definition of a block trade varies across different financial products. For instance, on the equities market, a block trade has traditionally been defined as a trade of 10,000 shares or more or a trade with a total market value of at least $200,000. In contrast, a block trade on the options market has traditionally been defined as a trade of 500 contracts or more, with a total market value of at least $150,000.
Many studies have been conducted on the impact of large block trades on prices in the marketplace, especially as relates to the equities market. Because block trades are perceived to indicate the trading strategies of large institutional investors, market participants often monitor block trades to determine if the market in a given issue is becoming increasingly bearish or bullish. When the price of a block trade is higher than the best offer in the market at the time, market participants typically interpret this to mean the market direction is moving upward for this issue. Similarly, when the price of a block trade is lower than the best bid at the time, market participants typically interpret this to mean the market direction is moving downward for this issue. The execution of a block trade at a price outside the quotes is deemed so important that some trading workstation systems are configured to automatically trigger an actionable alert every time a block trade executed outside the quotes is detected.
On some markets, block trades outside the quotes are allowed, but only under certain conditions. If no such exception condition exists and a block trade executes outside of the quotes, the offending market center “owes a fill” to the market center that had the better price at the time the block trade was reported to the marketplace. The “satisfaction fill” is typically executed in the following manner. The market center whose quote was traded-through (“the aggrieved market center”) generally sends an electronic message (or satisfaction order) to the market center that traded-through the quotes (“the offending market center”) requesting satisfaction for the orders that were traded-through. When the offending market center fulfills the request for satisfaction by sending the requested number of shares (or contracts) at the block price to the aggrieved market center, the aggrieved market center then is able to adjust the trade price of the orders that were traded-through to be equal to the price of the shares (or contracts) that were part of the block trade. In this manner, the aggrieved market participants receive the price improvement they would have received had the block trade interacted with the public order book.
While this “satisfaction fill” process protects orders that were at the top of the book when the block trade executed, it does not protect orders that were lower down in the book or that had a non-displayed component, such as a reserve order. When a block trade executes at a price worse than the best bid or offer, orders lower down in the book or ones that have a non-displayed component become subject to potential arbitrage. With respect to orders that were not at the top of the book and were not protected, other market participants, seeing these orders, may attempt to promptly execute against these orders and then turn around and trade such instruments on another market center to benefit from the spread created between the price the order was posted at and what may be perceived as the market's more ‘informed’ price, as indicated by the price of the executed block trade. Order types with a non-displayed component, such as reserve orders, are targets for possible arbitrage whether they are at the top of the book or not. Only the displayed portion of a reserve order at the top of the book is eligible for satisfaction at the block trade price. Whenever the displayed portion is depleted by trading, it is replenished at its original price, which is superior to the block trade price. Other market participants will typically attempt to execute against the reserve order at its superior price until it moves away or is depleted.
Accordingly, there is a need for a posted limit order that will reprice itself less aggressively in view of a block trade executing in that issue at a trade price that is inferior to the prices quoted on the posting market center.
According to an aspect of the present invention, a method for repricing a posted limit order on a posting market center in view of a block trade executed on an away market center at an inferior price includes posting a limit order on a posting market center, receiving data regarding a block trade executed on an away market center, determining that the block trade executed at an inferior price to the limit order posted on the posting market center and automatically repricing the limit order posted on the posting market center to the inferior price that the block trade executed at. The posted limit order may be a buy order or a sell order. The posted limit order may also be a reserve order. The posting market center may operate in an equities marketplace, an options marketplace or any other financial instrument marketplace.
These and other features, aspects and advantages of the present invention will become better understood with regard to the following description, appended claims and accompanying drawings where:
Referring to
The posting market center 20 may also include a quote and last sale interface 23 that interacts with the away market centers 24 to capture quote and last sale information. This information is stored to a best bids and offers and last sales data structure 25. This data structure 25 is where the market best bid and offer information is stored. This data structure 25 is also where the market trade reports (prints) are stored. The posting market center 20 may also include an order and trade parameters data structure 27. The order and trade parameters data structure 27 stores pre-defined trading parameters and rules that are used by the order matching engine 21 in matching orders and executing trades. The posting market center 20 may also include an order and execution interface 28 which interacts with the traders 26, the Market Makers 31, the away market centers 24 and the order matching engine 21 in the order execution process. The posting market center 20 may also include an order information data structure 29 where order information is stored and a trade information data structure 30 where completed trade information is stored. The posting market center 20 may also include a Market Maker interface 32 that interacts with Market Makers 31 to capture Market Maker bids and offers in assigned issues. These bids and offers are logically depicted in a Market Maker Quotes structure 33 in this illustration. In actuality, the Market Maker bids and offers may physically reside in the away market center best bids and offers data structure 25.
Throughout the discussion herein, it should be understood that the details regarding the operating environment, data structures, and other technological elements surrounding the posting market center 20 are by way of example and that the present invention may be implemented in various differing forms. For example, the data structures referred to herein may be implemented using any appropriate structure, data storage, or retrieval methodology (e.g., local or remote data storage in data bases, tables, internal arrays, etc.). Furthermore, a market center of the type described herein may support any type of suitable interface on any suitable computer system.
Incoming Reprice-to-Block Buy Order
At step 102, the process checks to see if the buy order is marketable against the best offers in the marketplace. It should be understood that reprice-to-block orders trade like any other limit order, and trade against the marketplace accordingly. If the buy order is marketable, the process proceeds to step 104 where the order matching engine 21 trades the new buy order against sell orders posted in the posting market center's order book and/or routes to superior away market quotes according to the market center's trading rules. Then, at step 106, the process checks to see if the buy order still has any quantity remaining on the order to be traded. If the buy order does not, then the order is complete, and the process ends with respect to this order, as indicated at step 114. If the order is not complete and still has quantity remaining to be traded, the process proceeds to step 110. Referring back to step 102, if the incoming buy order is not marketable, the process proceeds to step 110 at this point as well.
At step 110, the process sets the “OriginalPrice” parameter equal to the price set in the incoming reprice-to-block buy order. The “OriginalPrice” parameter retains the original order price for later audit purposes. Next, at step 112, the order is inserted into the posting market center's virtual consolidated electronic order and quote book (“internal book”) and displayed on the public order book according to the price/time priority rules. The process terminates at step 114.
Detection of New Last Sale and Repricing of Posted Reprice-To-Block Buy Order in Response to a Block Trade at an Inferior Price
With the tagged reprice-to-block order posted to the order book, the process, in this embodiment, continuously polls the last sale prices from the market-wide “Tape.” The “Tape” refers to the facility that disseminates continuous trade information for a given symbol to the entire marketplace. For example, trades in exchange-listed securities are reported to the Consolidated Tape, trades in Nasdaq-listed securities are reported to the UTP Trade Data Feed and trades in options are reported to the Options Price Reporting Authority. In this document, the term “Tape” is not limited to these facilities, and may include additional facilities that disseminate last sale information for other issues.
In this embodiment, the process instituted by the order matching engine 21 reads all trades printed on the away markets for various reasons, including, most pertinent to this invention, the need to determine if the away market trade printed at a price outside the posting market center best bid or offer, and if so, if the trade was a block trade. In this embodiment, if the process detects a block trade outside the posting market center's best bid or offer, the process checks the posting market center's order book to determine if any posted orders in the traded symbol carry a reprice-to-block tag.
Specifically, referring to
If the process determines that the trade was not a regular-way trade, the process ends as indicated at 126. If the process determines that the trade was a regular-way trade, the process proceeds to step 128 where the “PrintTradeVolume” parameter is set equal to the size of the trade. The process then proceeds to step 130 where it sets the “PrintTradePrice” parameter equal to the price of the trade.
Next, at steps 132, 134 and 142, the process retrieves the posting market center's best bid and offer price and compares these prices to the stored “PrintTradePrice” value. At step 134, the process determines whether the “PrintTradePrice” parameter value is lower than the posting market center's best bid. If it is determined that the “PrintTradePrice” parameter value is lower than the posting market center's best bid, the process proceeds to step 136 where it executes a routine to determine if the trade was a block trade. If, at step 134, the process determines that the “PrintTradePrice” parameter is not lower than the best bid posted on the posting market center 20, the process proceeds to step 142. At step 142, the process determines whether the “PrintTradePrice” parameter value is higher than the posting market center's best offer. If it is determined that the “PrintTradePrice” parameter value is higher than the posting market center's best offer, the process proceeds to step 146 where it executes a routine to determine if the trade was a block trade, as it did at step 136. If, at step 142, the process determines that the “PrintTradePrice” parameter value is not higher than the posting market center's best offer, then the process ends as indicated at step 144.
At steps 138 and 148, after the block trade determination process, as explained below, has been run and if the binary value of the “IsBlock” parameter equals “1” (true), meaning the trade was a block trade, then the process proceeds to implement processes for repricing either the applicable buy order (step 140) or applicable sell order (step 150) in view of the executed block trade.
Referring to
Referring again to step 165, if the process determines that the trade does not need to meet a minimum value requirement, in addition to meeting a minimum volume requirement, to be considered a block trade (as in the equities market), then the trade is a block trade and the parameter “IsBlock” in this example is set to “1” or true, as indicated at 174. If on the other hand, the trade must also meet a minimum market value requirement, such as in the options market, the process proceeds to step 166.
At step 166, the process retrieves the “MinBlockValue” parameter which is set to the minimum monetary value that the trade must execute at to be considered a block trade. At step 168, the process computes the value of the reported trade and stores it as the “TotalTradeValue” parameter. The “TotalTradeValue” parameter is equal to the volume of the print trade (i.e. “PrintTradeVolume”) multiplied by the price of the print trade (i.e. “PrintTradePrice”). The process then, at step 170, determines whether the “MinBlockValue” parameter is greater than the “TotalTradeValue” parameter. In this embodiment, if the “MinBlockValue” parameter is not greater than the “TotalTradeValue” parameter, the trade is a block trade, and the parameter “IsBlock” is set to “1” or true, as indicated at 174. If the “MinBlockValue” parameter is greater than the “TotalTradeValue” parameter, then the print trade is not a block trade and the “IsBlock” parameter is set to “0” or false, as indicated at 172. As indicated at steps 176 and 178, the value of the “IsBlock” parameter is passed to the process at steps 138 and 148 (
Referring back to
Referring to
Incoming Reprice-to-Block Sell Order
Referring to
At step 310, the process sets the “OriginalPrice” parameter equal to the price set in the incoming reprice-to-block sell order. Next, at step 312, the order is inserted into the posting market center's internal order book and displayed on the public order book according to the price/time priority rules. The process terminates at step 314.
Repricing a Reprice-To-Block Sell Order
Referring to
Examples of how tagged reprice-to-block orders operate are provided below. It should be understood that the order and quote prices and sizes, as well as Print prices, discussed in these examples are by way of example only to illustrate how the process of an embodiment of the invention handles repricing a tagged order to an executed block trade price.
At the start of the examples that follow, the internal order book of a posting market center appears as indicated. The issue used in this example is an equity security. The best bid and offer from an away market 24a is also shown included in the internal book in these examples. The posting market center 20 in this example is at the best bid with 11,000 at $20.02 and is also at the best offer with 5000 at $20.03. Away Market Center A is bidding 2000 at $20.00 and offering 1000 at $20.03. The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center book looks like this:
At step 100, the process receives the following incoming reprice-to-block buy order:
At step 102, the process determines that Order E is not marketable, as there is no overlap between the buy order price and the best offer price. At step 110, it stores the order price as the OriginalPrice for audit purposes, and at step 112, it posts the reprice-to-block order to the internal book and public posting market center book according to normal price/time priority rules. The process terminates at step 114.
The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center book looks like this:
In this example, the posting market center 20 receives the following reprice-to-block buy order at step 100:
At step 102, the process determines that Order F is not marketable, as there is no overlap between the buy order price and the best offer price. At step 110, it stores the order price as the OriginalPrice for audit purposes, and in step 112 it posts the reprice-to-block order to the internal book and the public posting market center order book according to normal price/time priority rules. The process terminates at step 114.
The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center order book looks like this:
At step 120, the process detects the following Print (Last Sale) on the Tape:
At step 122, the process determines that this trade did not execute on the posting market center 20 (i.e. it is an away market execution), and at step 124, the process determines that this is a regular-way trade. As such, at step 128, the process sets the “PrintTradeVolume” parameter equal to 10,000, the size of the trade. At step 130, the process sets the “PrintTradePrice” parameter equal to $20.02, the price of the trade.
Then, at step 132, the process retrieves the posting market center's best bid and offer and at step 134, the process compares the PrintTradePrice parameter ($20.02) to the posting market center best bid ($20.02). As the PrintTradePrice parameter is not lower than the posting market center best bid, the process does not need to check for the presence of any reprice-to-block buy orders. The process continues to step 142 accordingly.
At step 142, the process compares the PrintTradePrice parameter ($20.02) to the posting market center's best offer ($20.03). As the PrintTradePrice parameter is not higher than the posting market center's best offer, the process does not need to check for the presence of any reprice-to-block sell orders. For this last sale price, the process is complete, as indicated at step 144.
The internal book still looks like this:
At step 120, the process detects the following Print on the Tape:
At step 122, the process determines that this trade did not execute on the posting market center, and at step 124, the process determines that this is a regular-way trade. At step 128, the process sets the PrintTradeVolume parameter equal to 9,500, the size of the trade. At step 130, the process sets the PrintTradePrice parameter equal to $20.01, the price of the trade.
At step 132, the process retrieves the posting market center's best bid and offer, and at step 134, the process compares the PrintTradePrice parameter ($20.01) to the posting market center's best bid ($20.02). As the PrintTradePrice parameter is lower than the posting market center best bid, the process continues to step 136 and initiates the process to determine if the Last Sale constitutes a block trade at step 160 (
At step 162, the process retrieves the MinBlockVolume parameter, which, in this example, is presently set to 10,000 shares. At step 164, the process compares the PrintTradeVolume parameter (9,500) to the MinBlockVolume parameter (10,000). As the PrintTradeVolume is less than the MinBlockVolume, the process continues to step 166. At step 166, the process retrieves the MinBlockValue parameter, which is presently set to $200,000.
At step 168, the process computes the TotalTradeValue parameter by multiplying the PrintTradeVolume parameter (9,500) by the PrintTradePrice parameter ($20.01). The derived TotalTradeValue=$190,095. At step 170, the process compares the TotalTradeValue ($190,095) to the MinBlockValue ($200,000). As the TotalTradeValue is less than the MinBlockValue, the process determines that this trade does not constitute a block trade. At step 172, the flag “IsBlock” is set to “0” (false).
At step 176, the process passes the binary value back to step 138 in the process New Last Sale Detected (
The internal book still looks like this:
The process receives the following limit order:
The process matches incoming Order G with 10,000 shares of posted Order A according to normal trading rules, depleting all of Order G and leaving 1,000 shares of Order A posted to the book.
The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center order book looks like this:
A few seconds later, at step 120, the process detects the resulting Print on the Tape:
At step 122, the process determines that this trade executed on the posting market center 20, so it ends the process at step 126. Only away market trades can reprice reprice-to-block orders.
In this example, the internal book still appear as follows:
At step 120, the process detects the following Print on the Tape:
At step 122, the process determines that this trade did not execute on the posting market center 20, and at step 124, the process determines that this is a regular-way trade. At step 128, the process sets the PrintTradeVolume parameter equal to 10,000, the size of the trade. At step 130, the process sets the PrintTradePrice parameter equal to $20.00, the price of the trade.
At step 132, the process retrieves the posting market center's best bid and offer, and in step 134, the process compares the PrintTradePrice parameter ($20.00) to the posting marker center best bid ($20.02). As the PrintTradePrice parameter is lower than the posting market center best bid, the process continues to step 136 and initiates the process to determine if the Last Sale constitutes a block trade, at step 160 (
At step 162, the process retrieves the MinBlockVolume parameter, which, in this example, is set to 10,000 shares. At step 164, the process compares the PrintTradeVolume parameter (10,000) to the MinBlockVolume parameter (10,000). As the PrintTradeVolume is the same as the MinBlockVolume, the process proceeds to step 165 where it determines if the trade must also meet minimum marketplace value requirements. As this example uses an equity security issue as its basis and block trades are not required to meet minimum value requirements in addition to minimum volume requirements, the process proceeds from step 165 to step 174.
At step 174, the process sets the flag “IsBlock” equal to “1” (true). At step 176, the process passes the binary value back to step 138 in the process New Last Sale Detected (
At step 202, the process retrieves the first reprice-to-block buy order, Order E. At step 204, it compares the price of Order E ($20.02) to the PrintTradePrice ($20.00). As the buy order's price is higher, at step 206, the process changes Order E's price to $20.00, the price of the PrintTradePrice. At step 208, the process inserts the repriced order in the internal book according to its new price/time priority.
The internal book momentarily appears as follows after Order E has been repriced:
At step 210, the process checks to see if there are any more buy orders with RTB=Y and determines that there are. The process returns to step 202 and retrieves the next reprice-to-block order, Order F. At step 204, the process compares the price of Order F ($20.01) to the PrintTradePrice ($20.00). As the buy order's price is higher, the process changes Order F's price to $20.00, the value of the PrintTradePrice, at step 206. At step 208, the process inserts the repriced order in the internal order book according to its new price/time priority. At step 210, the process again checks to see if any more buy orders with RTB=Y exist, and finding none in this example, ends the update process at step 212.
The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center book now looks like this:
At around the same time the above process is happening, a market participant has also detected the block trade that executed priced at $20.00, and this market participant also detected the superior-priced bids that were displayed on the posting market center prior to being repriced. As a reminder, at the time the block trade at $20.00 was reported to the Tape, the public book for the posting market center looked like this:
The market participant that detected the block trade at $20.00 sees that the posting market center is displaying 5300 orders superior to the block trade at $20.00 (i.e. 1400 at $20.02 and 3900 at $20.01). The market participant attempts to trade against the superior priced orders immediately.
The posting market center 20 receives the following order:
The process retrieves the highest buy order, Order A. It compares the price of Order A ($20.02) to the price of incoming Order H ($20.01). As the prices overlap, the process matches 1000 shares at $20.02, Order A's price, completely filling Order A and removing it from the books. The process checks to see if incoming Order H still has additional shares to trade, and determines that it has 5000 shares remaining.
The process retrieves the next buy order, Order B. It compares the price of Order B ($20.01) to the price of incoming Order H ($20.01): As the prices are equal, the process matches 5000 shares at $20.01, completely filling Order B and removing it from the books. The process first matches the 3000 displayed shares of Order B and then matches the 2000 reserve shares of Order B. The process checks to see if incoming Order H still has additional shares to trade, and determining that none remain, the process is terminated.
The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center book now looks like this:
As illustrated in this example, Orders A and B left themselves open to arbitrage since they were not reprice-to-block orders. After the block trade, Orders A and B remained at their original prices. As a result, these orders, Orders A and B, were hit by an incoming order taking advantage of this arbitrage opportunity.
In contrast, Orders E and F, which were tagged to reprice, promptly repriced to the block trade price when the block trade at the inferior price was detected. As a result, the automatic repricing of these orders prevented then from being hit at their original, superior order price. Once repriced, a reprice-to-block order, such as Orders E and F in this example, do not revert to their original price. However, Orders E and F could be repriced lower. For instance, should another block trade subsequently trade at a price that is lower than their current price ($20.00), Orders E and F would be automatically repriced again, and their previous price would be stored for audit purposes as well. This process is repeated as necessary until Orders E and F are fully executed or canceled.
Away Market Center A then changes its offer price to $20.01. The internal book looks like this:
Market Center A's Offer of $20.01 is now the best offer. As shown in the examples that follow, reprice-to-block orders are repriced whenever a worse-priced block trade is detected, regardless of whether the posting market center 20 is at the NBBO or not.
At step 300, the process receives the following incoming reprice-to-block sell order:
At step 302, the process determines that Order I is not marketable, as there is no overlap between the sell order price and the best bid price. (Note that even though the OriginalPrice of Order E is $20.02, the order can only trade at its current price of $20.00.) At step 310, the process stores the order price as the OriginalPrice for audit purposes, and at step 312, it posts the reprice-to-block order to the internal book and the public posting market center order book according to normal price/time priority rules. The process terminates at step 314.
The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center order book now looks like this:
At step 120, the process detects the following Print on the Tape:
At step 122, the process determines that this trade did not execute on the posting market center 20, and at step 124, it determines that this is a regular-way trade. At step 128, the process sets the PrintTradeVolume parameter equal to 10,000, the size of the trade. At step 130, it sets the PrintTradePrice parameter equal to $20.02, the price of the trade.
At step 132, the process retrieves the posting market center best bid and offer and in step 134, it compares the PrintTradePrice ($20.02) to the posting market center best bid ($20.00). As the PrintTradePrice parameter is not lower than the posting market center best bid, the process does not need to check for the presence of any reprice-to-block buy orders, so the process continues to step 142.
At step 142, the process compares the PrintTradePrice parameter ($20.02) to the posting market center best offer ($20.02). As the PrintTradePrice parameter is not higher than the posting market center best offer (the prices are equal), the process does not need to check for the presence of any reprice-to-block sell orders. The process, in this example, is complete as indicated at step 144.
In step 120, the process detects the following Print on the Tape:
At step 122, the process determines that this trade did not execute on the posting market center 20, and in step 124, it determines that this is a regular-way trade. At step 128, the process sets the PrintTradeVolume parameter equal to 9,500, the size of the trade. At step 130, it sets the PrintTradePrice parameter equal to $20.03, the price of the trade.
At step 132, the process retrieves the posting market center's best bid and offer and in step 134, the process compares the PrintTradePrice parameter ($20.03) to the posting market center's best bid ($20.00). As the PrintTradePrice parameter is not lower than the posting market center's best bid, the process does not need to reprice any reprice-to-block buy orders, so the process continues to step 142. At step 142, the process compares the PrintTradePrice parameter ($20.03) to the posting market center's best offer price ($20.02) and determines that the PrintTradePrice parameter is higher. The process proceeds to step 146 and initiates the process to determine if the Last Sale constitutes a block trade at step 160 (
At step 162, the process retrieves the MinBlockVolume parameter, which is currently set to 10,000 shares. At step 164, the process compares the PrintTradeVolume parameter (9,500) to the MinBlockVolume parameter (10,000). As the PrintTradeVolume parameter is less than the MinBlockVolume parameter, it proceeds to step 166.
At step 166, the process retrieves the MinBlockValue parameter, which is currently set to $200,000. At step 168, the process computes the TotalTradeValue parameter by multiplying the PrintTradeVolume (9,500) by the PrintTradePrice ($20.03). The derived TotalTradeValue=$190,285. At step 170, the process compares the TotalTradeValue ($190,285) to the MinBlockValue ($200,000). As the TotalTradeValue is less than the MinBlockValue, it determines that this trade does not constitute a block trade. At step 172, it sets the flag “IsBlock”=0 (false).
At step 176, the process passes the binary value back to step 148 in the process New Last Sale Detected (
The internal book still looks like this:
At step 120, the process detects the following Print on the Tape:
At step 122, the process determines that this trade did not execute on the posting market center 20, and at step 124, the process determines that this is a regular-way trade. At step 128, the process sets the PrintTradeVolume parameter=10,000, the size of the trade. At step 130, it sets the PrintTradePrice parameter=$20.03, the price of the trade.
At step 132, the process retrieves the posting market center best bid and offer, and at step 134, it compares the PrintTradePrice ($20.03) to the posting market center's best bid ($20.00). As the PrintTradePrice is not lower than the posting market center's best bid, the process does not need to reprice any reprice-to-block buy orders, so the process continues to step 142. At step 142, the process compares the PrintTradePrice ($20.03) to the posting market center's best offer price ($20.02) and determines that the PrintTradePrice is higher. The process proceeds to step 146 and initiates the process to determine if the Last Sale constitutes a block trade at step 160 (
At step 162, the process retrieves the MinBlockVolume parameter, which is currently set to 10,000 shares. At step 164, the process compares the PrintTradeVolume (10,000) to the MinBlockVolume (10,000). As the PrintTradeVolume is the same as the MinBlockVolume, it proceeds to step 165, where it checks if the trade must also meet minimum market value requirements. In this example, since this issue is an equity security, the volume and value requirements do not both need to be satisfied, and the process proceeds to step 174.
At step 174, the process sets the flag IsBlock=1 (true). At step 176, the process passes the binary value back to step 148 in the process New Last Sale Detected (
At step 402, the process retrieves the first reprice-to-block sell order, Order I. At step 404, the process compares the price of Order I ($20.02) to the PrintTradePrice ($20.03). As the sell order's price is lower, at step 406, the process changes Order I's price to $20.03, the price of the PrintTradePrice. At step 408, the process inserts the repriced order in the internal book according to its new price/time priority. At step 410, the process checks to see if other sell orders with RTB=Y exist, and finding none, ends the update process at step 412.
The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center order book now looks like this:
As with Orders E and F in the buy order example above, once repriced, Order I is never reset to its original price. However, Order I could be repriced higher. For instance, should another block trade subsequently trade at a price that is higher than Order I's current price ($20.03), Order I would be automatically repriced again, and its previous price would be stored for audit purposes as well. This process is repeated as necessary until Order I is fully executed or canceled.
This example, Example 11, is an equity options example and is similar to Example 10 above except that orders and quotes in an equity options issue are shown rather than the orders and quotes in an equity security issue that were shown in Example 10. The particular issue discussed in this example does not have Market Makers assigned to it and, therefore, Market Maker quotes are not discussed in this example. Even if Market Maker quotes were present, they would not be relevant to this discussion, as only orders, not quotes, can be repriced-to-block. As previously described, the definition of a block trade is different on an options market than on an equities market.
At the start of this example, the internal book looks like this. Note that Order L and Order M have already been previously repriced-to-block, as evidenced by their higher OriginalPrices:
At step 120, the process detects the following Print on the Tape:
At step 122, the process determines that this trade did not execute on the posting market center 20, and at step 124, the process determines that this is a regular-way trade. At step 128, the process sets the PrintTradeVolume parameter=70,000, the size of the trade. At step 130, it sets the PrintTradePrice parameter=$2.15, the price of the trade.
At step 132, the process retrieves the posting market center best bid and offer, and at step 134, it compares the PrintTradePrice ($2.15) to the posting market center's best bid ($2.00). As the PrintTradePrice is not lower than the posting market center's best bid, the process does not need to reprice any reprice-to-block buy orders, so the process continues to step 142. At step 142, the process compares the PrintTradePrice ($2.15) to the posting market center's best offer price ($2.10) and determines that the PrintTradePrice is higher. The process proceeds to step 146 and initiates the process to determine if the Last Sale constitutes a block trade at step 160 (
At step 162, the process retrieves the MinBlockVolume parameter, which is currently set to 500 contracts. At step 164, the process compares the PrintTradeVolume (70,000) to the MinBlockVolume (500). As the PrintTradeVolume is higher than the MinBlockVolume, it proceeds to step 165.
At step 165, the process checks whether this trade must also meet minimum market value requirements to constitute a block trade. In this example, since the issue is an equity option, the volume and value requirements both need to be satisfied, and the process proceeds to step 166. At step 166, the process retrieves the MinBlockValue parameter, which in this example is set to $150,000. At step 168, the process computes the TotalTradeValue parameter by multiplying the PrintTradeVolume parameter (70,000) by the PrintTradePrice ($2.15). The computed TotalTradeValue=$150,500. At step 170, the process compares the TotalTradeValue ($150,500) to the MinBlockValue ($150,000). As the TotalTradeValue is higher than the MinBlockValue, it determines that this trade does constitute a block trade.
At step 174, the process sets the flag IsBlock=1 (true). At step 176, the process passes the binary value back to step 148 in the process New Last Sale Detected (
At step 402, the process retrieves the first reprice-to-block sell order, Order N. At step 404, the process compares the price of Order N ($2.10) to the PrintTradePrice ($2.15). As the sell order's price is lower, at step 406, the process changes Order N's price to $2.15, the price of the PrintTradePrice. At step 408, the process inserts the repriced order in the internal book according to its new price/time priority. At step 410, the process checks to see if other sell orders with RTB=Y exist, and finding none, ends the update process at step 412.
The internal book looks like this:
The public posting market center order book now looks like this:
Order N, as with other repriced-to-block orders above, never resets to its original price after it has been repriced. However, Order N could be repriced higher if necessary. For instance, should another block trade subsequently trade at a price that is higher than Order N's current price ($2.15), Order N would be automatically repriced again, and its previous price would be stored for audit purposes as well. This process is repeated as necessary until Order N is fully executed or canceled.
While the invention has been discussed in terms of certain embodiments, it should be appreciated that the invention is not so limited. The embodiments are explained herein by way of example, and there are numerous modifications, variations and other embodiments that may be employed that would still be within the scope of the present invention.
This application is a divisional of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/416,942, filed May 3, 2006 now U.S. Pat. No. 7,877,316, entitled “REPRICE-TO-BLOCK ORDER”, which claims priority from and claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 60/678,108, filed May 5, 2005, entitled “Reprice-to-Block Order Modifier”, each of which is hereby incorporated by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
5101353 | Lupien et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5845266 | Lupien et al. | Dec 1998 | A |
5905974 | Fraser et al. | May 1999 | A |
5950176 | Keiser et al. | Sep 1999 | A |
6012046 | Lupien et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6098051 | Lupien et al. | Aug 2000 | A |
6278982 | Korhammer et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6343278 | Jain et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6377940 | Tilfors et al. | Apr 2002 | B2 |
6405180 | Tilfors et al. | Jun 2002 | B2 |
6408282 | Buist | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6505174 | Keiser et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6505175 | Silverman et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6615188 | Breen et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6618707 | Gary | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6714948 | Richards | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6829589 | Saliba | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6832210 | Li | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6850907 | Lutnick et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6963856 | Lutnick et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
6983260 | Hummelgren | Jan 2006 | B2 |
7162448 | Madoff et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7184982 | Howorka et al. | Feb 2007 | B1 |
7197483 | Brady et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7209896 | Serkin et al. | Apr 2007 | B1 |
7225153 | Lange | May 2007 | B2 |
7242669 | Bundy et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7246090 | Thomas | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7246093 | Katz | Jul 2007 | B1 |
7249086 | Bloom et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7356498 | Kaminsky et al. | Apr 2008 | B2 |
7383220 | Keith | Jun 2008 | B1 |
7467110 | Muller et al. | Dec 2008 | B2 |
7685057 | Chiulli et al. | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7765137 | Adcock et al. | Jul 2010 | B1 |
7792733 | Keith | Sep 2010 | B1 |
7873561 | Adcock et al. | Jan 2011 | B1 |
7912775 | Brill et al. | Mar 2011 | B1 |
20010037284 | Finkelstein et al. | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020010672 | Waelbroeck et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020010673 | Muller et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020019795 | Madoff et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020019799 | Ginsberg et al. | Feb 2002 | A1 |
20020042765 | Dawson | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020062273 | Perkel et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020082979 | Sands et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020091617 | Keith | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020091621 | Conklin et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020120511 | Hanes | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020128951 | Kiron et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020128955 | Brady et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020128958 | Slone | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143676 | Kiron et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020147670 | Lange | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020161687 | Serkin et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020169703 | Lutnick et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020184135 | Zakaria | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020184136 | Cleary et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020198815 | Greifeld et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20020198816 | Gilbert et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030004851 | Kiron et al. | Jan 2003 | A2 |
20030004858 | Schmitz et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009400 | Kiron et al. | Jan 2003 | A2 |
20030009412 | Furbush et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009413 | Furbush et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009414 | Furbush et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014351 | Neff et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030023536 | Hollerman et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030040955 | Anaya et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030041006 | Bunda | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030083974 | Bunda | May 2003 | A1 |
20030093343 | Huttenlocher et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030097328 | Lundberg et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030115131 | Heaton et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030130920 | Freund | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030130925 | Malitzis | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030130926 | Moore et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030135443 | Moore et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030139998 | Gilbert et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030172024 | Kokis et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030177082 | Buckwalter | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030191703 | Chen et al. | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20030216932 | Foley | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030229557 | Richmann et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20030233307 | Salvadori et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040030630 | Tilfors et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040044610 | Fraser et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040059666 | Waelbroeck et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040088242 | Ascher et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040143538 | Korhammer et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040143542 | Magill et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040177024 | Bok et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040177026 | Balabon | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040210508 | Bohnenberger et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040210511 | Waelbroeck et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040215538 | Smith et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040225592 | Churquina | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040236662 | Korhammer et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040236669 | Horst et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040243502 | Slowik et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040254804 | Peterffy et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040254877 | Buckwalter et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040267655 | Davidowitz et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050010481 | Lutnick et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050075963 | Balabon | Apr 2005 | A1 |
20050096999 | Newell et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050119964 | Brady et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050125316 | Levering et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050137962 | Penney et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20050160024 | Soderborg et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20050171887 | Daley et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171888 | Daley et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171889 | Daley et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171890 | Daley et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171891 | Daley et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050171895 | Howorka et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050197916 | Newell et al. | Sep 2005 | A1 |
20050222936 | Panariti et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050228739 | Leibowitz | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050240510 | Schweickert et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050273407 | Black et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050273408 | Bandman et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050273419 | Ogg et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283415 | Studnitzer et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283421 | Hatheway et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283426 | Krishnasami et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050283427 | Owens et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060020536 | Renton et al. | Jan 2006 | A1 |
20060031157 | Gianakouros et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060089898 | Durkin et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060089899 | Durkin et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060136318 | Rafieyan et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060136326 | Heckman et al. | Jun 2006 | A1 |
20060149659 | Carone et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060161494 | Littlewood | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060184444 | McConaughy et al. | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060206404 | Hatheway et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060206407 | Troxel et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060235786 | DiSalvo | Oct 2006 | A1 |
20060253374 | Addock et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060253375 | Adcock et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060253378 | Adcock et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060253379 | Adcock et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060253380 | Adcock et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060253381 | Adcock et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060253382 | Adcock et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060259391 | Schoen et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060277137 | Claus et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20060277138 | Ross et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070022041 | Durkin et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070043647 | Bickford | Feb 2007 | A1 |
20070055607 | Wunsch et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070073611 | Drake et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070078753 | Cormack et al. | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070112693 | Cushing | May 2007 | A1 |
20070198391 | Dreyer et al. | Aug 2007 | A1 |
20070244792 | Couperier et al. | Oct 2007 | A1 |
20080228622 | Adcock et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080228623 | Adcock et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20090070250 | Adcock et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
20090125431 | Armstrong et al. | May 2009 | A1 |
20090157539 | Adcock et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20100030704 | Griffin et al. | Feb 2010 | A1 |
20100121759 | Waelbroeck et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100332374 | Adcock et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110082784 | Adcock et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110231298 | Adcock et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
2006244499 | Jan 2006 | AU |
2006244483 | Nov 2006 | AU |
2006244562 | Nov 2006 | AU |
2006244563 | Nov 2006 | AU |
2006244564 | Nov 2006 | AU |
1321870 | Jun 2003 | EP |
0122322 | Mar 2001 | WO |
0122339 | Mar 2001 | WO |
0152166 | Jul 2001 | WO |
0175733 | Oct 2001 | WO |
0190925 | Nov 2001 | WO |
0207039 | Jan 2002 | WO |
0209008 | Jan 2002 | WO |
2004008296 | Jan 2004 | WO |
2005010790 | Feb 2005 | WO |
2005036354 | Apr 2005 | WO |
2006121687 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2006121688 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2006121689 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2006121691 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2006121792 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2006121796 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2006121812 | Nov 2006 | WO |
2007038084 | Apr 2007 | WO |
2007038218 | Apr 2007 | WO |
2008013776 | Jan 2008 | WO |
2008013828 | Jan 2008 | WO |
2008013916 | Jan 2008 | WO |
2008013917 | Jan 2008 | WO |
2008024172 | Feb 2008 | WO |
2008027124 | Mar 2008 | WO |
2008073252 | Jun 2008 | WO |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110082784 A1 | Apr 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60678108 | May 2005 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 11416942 | May 2006 | US |
Child | 12928292 | US |