Analyzing the Most Effective Strategies for Regulators to Address Dark Trading in Islamic Capital Markets

Pourquoi ce travail est-il dans la base ?

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Résumé

1. Introduction and ObjectiveThe rapid evolution of modern financial markets has given rise to complex trading mechanisms designed to balance transparency with efficiency. Among these mechanisms, dark trading—including both opaque trading networks (dark pools) and hidden orders—has become a central area of debate in securities regulation. While dark pools and hidden orders were originally introduced to mitigate disruptive effects of large trades, reduce market impact, and shield institutional investors from predatory practices, their expansion has generated serious concerns. These concerns are not limited to efficiency and fairness but extend to fundamental questions of legitimacy in the context of Islamic financial jurisprudence (fiqh al-muʿāmalāt). The central issue addressed in this study is the tension between market transparency, which promotes fairness and efficient price discovery, and the concealment of orders and quotes, which may protect certain traders but simultaneously generate uncertainty, fragment liquidity, and restrict fair access to information. From a Sharia perspective, these mechanisms are closely connected to jurisprudential rules such as the prohibition of gharar (excessive uncertainty), ghurūr (deception), tadlīs (misrepresentation), najash (artificial bidding), and lā ḍarar (prohibition of harmful transactions).The objective of the present research is therefore twofold. First, it seeks to provide a comprehensive descriptive and analytical account of dark trading practices—both in hidden orders and dark pools—by drawing on international experiences in the United States, Europe, and Canada as well as domestic experiences in Iran. Second, it aims to evaluate these practices through the lens of Sharia jurisprudence, in order to determine whether they can be accommodated, restricted, or prohibited within Islamic capital markets. By combining financial, regulatory, and jurisprudential analyses, the study aspires to deliver a complete framework for regulators of Islamic markets to adopt policies that maximize efficiency while safeguarding religious and ethical legitimacy.2. Methods and MaterialsThe research adopts a mixed-method design, integrating descriptive-analytical methods with qualitative and quantitative empirical approaches. Three complementary sources of evidence were used in line with a triangulation strategy:1. Library research: A comprehensive review of books, peer-reviewed articles, dissertations, official regulatory reports, and primary documents in both Persian and English was conducted. The review covered not only theoretical literature on hidden liquidity but also comparative analyses of international regulatory experiences, including the MiFID I and MiFID II directives in Europe, the practices of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and Canadian capital market reforms.2. Expert consultations through focus groups: A group of five experienced scholars in financial jurisprudence (fiqh al-mālī) participated in a structured focus group session lasting 150 minutes. Discussions centered on the permissibility of hidden orders and dark pools under Islamic jurisprudence. The scholars examined the extent to which rules such as gharar, lā ḍarar, and ḥifẓ al-niẓām (preservation of market order) apply to the new phenomenon of dark trading.3. Jurisprudential validation through istiftāʾ: Formal inquiries were submitted to the offices of prominent Shia jurists, including Ayatollah Sistani, Ayatollah Wahid Khorasani, Ayatollah Khamenei, Ayatollah Javadi Amoli, Ayatollah Makarem Shirazi, Ayatollah Shobeiri Zanjani, Ayatollah Alavi Gorgani, and Ayatollah Nouri Hamedani. The responses provided definitive legal opinions that complemented the findings from the literature and focus group discussions. For the quantitative strand, the study designed two Likert-scale questionnaires, one concerning hidden orders (four regulatory models) and the other concerning dark pools (five regulatory models). These questionnaires were distributed among a panel of experts in the Iranian capital market, including regulators, policy researchers, and managers of state-owned financial institutions. Importantly, individuals with private interests—such as shareholders of investment companies or private brokerage houses—were excluded to avoid conflicts of interest. The collected data were analyzed using Friedman’s non-parametric ranking test in SPSS. This test was employed to determine whether experts assigned significantly different importance levels to various regulatory models. Cronbach’s alpha for the questionnaire was calculated at 0.76, exceeding the conventional threshold of 0.70, thus confirming the reliability of the instrument.3. Research FindingsThe findings can be grouped into three major domains: financial-regulatory, jurisprudential, and empirical.Financial and regulatory findings: The survey and Friedman ranking demonstrated that transparency-oriented models consistently received the highest priority from experts. In the case of hidden orders, mechanisms that imposed minimum display requirements (e.g., iceberg orders with mandatory visible portions) were favored, while complete concealment of orders was considered highly problematic. For dark pools, models that relied on real-time reference pricing from transparent exchanges (such as mid-quote mechanisms) received higher rankings, while those that operated entirely without price transparency were downgraded. Experts noted that while dark trading mechanisms may reduce short-term price impact, they fragment liquidity, reduce informational efficiency, and compromise fair access. Empirical evidence from Europe and the U.S. corroborates these observations: dark pools captured up to 40% of trading volume in the U.S. by 2019, but regulators responded with stricter rules (MiFID II’s double volume caps) to protect price discovery. In Iran, hidden orders were initially introduced but later prohibited in 2019 due to structural distortions and misleading order books. Jurisprudential findings: From the perspective of Sharia, complete concealment of orders was judged to conflict with the prohibition of gharar, ghurūr, and najash. These mechanisms were seen to create deceptive appearances of supply and demand, thereby misleading other traders. The focus group discussions emphasized that even if investors consent to trade under such conditions, reliance on qāʿidat al-iqdām (assumption of risk) is not sufficient to override fundamental prohibitions, since Sharia does not permit individuals to willingly expose their wealth to harm. Nonetheless, limited forms of concealment could be justified under secondary principles such as ḥifẓ al-niẓām (preservation of market order) or lā ḍarar (prevention of greater harm), particularly when transparency itself creates vulnerabilities such as predatory high-frequency trading or excessive herding behavior. In such circumstances, tools like iceberg orders with mandatory visible components, or dark pools that rely on transparent reference prices, might be permissible. The jurisprudential opinions obtained through istiftāʾ confirmed these conclusions: while blanket prohibition was advised against full concealment, controlled and well-regulated mechanisms were not ruled out in principle. Empirical findings from the Friedman test: The statistical analysis revealed significant differences in the importance assigned to various regulatory models. The null hypothesis—that experts viewed all models as equally important—was rejected. In the domain of hidden orders, transparency-oriented models ranked highest, followed by limited iceberg mechanisms. In the domain of dark pools, reference-price models ranked above opaque internalization mechanisms. This confirmed that policy priorities align both with market efficiency considerations and with Sharia jurisprudential boundaries.4. Discussion and ConclusionThe research highlights a fundamental tension in modern capital markets between the goals of efficiency and fairness on the one hand, and the risks of uncertainty and deception on the other. From a purely financial perspective, dark trading offers advantages such as reducing immediate price impact, curbing imitation trading, and shielding institutional investors from market predators. Yet these benefits are counterbalanced by costs, including fragmentation of liquidity, diminished price discovery, and unfair access to information. From an Islamic jurisprudential perspective, the evaluation is even stricter. Sharia emphasizes the elimination of gharar and ghurūr, the protection of property rights, and the maintenance of justice and fairness in markets. Any mechanism that misleads participants, creates artificial prices, or exposes investors—particularly retail traders—to hidden risks cannot be justified. Nevertheless, Sharia also recognizes secondary principles that allow for pragmatic accommodations when necessary to preserve the overall order and integrity of markets. The combined evidence suggests that while complete concealment of orders or quotes is both financially inefficient and jurisprudentially impermissible, controlled concealment under strict regulatory frameworks may be acceptable. For example, requiring a minimum display portion in iceberg orders, ensuring that dark pools continuously update prices based on transparent exchanges, and restricting access to certain institutional categories can reduce harmful effects while preserving market stability.Policy recommendations derived from this research emphasize the following:1. Prioritize transparency as the default regulatory stance in Islamic capital markets, both to safeguard price discovery and to align with jurisprudential mandates.2. Permit limited dark mechanisms only under carefully designed rules, such as volume thresholds, reference pricing, and institutional restrictions, where they demonstrably serve the higher objective of preserving mar

Conservé avec la notice de tri, où il sert de preuve aux étiquettes ci-dessus.

La notice

Revue

DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)

Thématique

Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies

Domaine

Neuroscience

Établissements canadiens

—

Organismes subventionnaires

—

Mots-clés

Dark liquidityTransparency (behavior)Capital marketContext (archaeology)ShariaOrder (exchange)IslamFinancial market

Résumé présent dans OpenAlex

oui

API

/api/v1/works/W7084139596