Price-limit effectiveness: evidence from the Borsa Istanbul (BIST)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose This paper aims to analyze the impact of price-limit hits by hit type and when such hits start and stop using intraday trades and quotes at a one-second frequency for firms included in the BIST-50 index during the 13-months starting with March 2008. Like the recent COVID-19 period, this period includes the heightened stress in global financial markets in September 2008. Design/methodology/approach Using intra-day trades and quotes at a one-second frequency, the authors examine the market effects of price limits for firms included in the BIST-50 index during the global financial crisis. The authors compare the values of various metrics for 60 min centered on price-limit hit periods. The authors conduct robustness tests using auto regressive integrated moving average (ARIMA) models with trade-by-trade and with 3-min returns. Findings The findings are supportive of the following hypotheses: magnet price effects, greater informational asymmetric effects of market quality and each version of price discovery. Results are robust using samples differentiated by cross-listed status, same-day quotes instead of transaction prices and equidistant and trade-by-trade returns. Originality/value The authors use intraday data to reduce measurement error that is particularly pronounced when daily data are used to assess price limits that start and/or stop during a trading session. The authors contribute to the micro-structure literature by using ARIMA models with trade-by-trade and 3-min returns to alleviate some bias due to the autocorrelations in returns around price-limit hits in the presence of a magnet effect. The authors include some recent regulation changes in various countries to illustrate the importance of circuit breakers using price limits during COVID-19.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".