Model reveals queuing uncertainty impacts liquidity supply and adverse selection in limit orders.
Limit orders submitted around the same time are subject to random latencies and will be queued accordingly. In equilibrium, end-of-queue limit orders always lose money—the liquidity supply appears excessive. The model generates empirical predictions regarding such “overshooting” liquidity: (i) new limit orders appear fleeting—clustered submissions are followed by immediate cancellations, (ii) the resulting cancel-to-add count ratio reflects adverse selection, and (iii) the cancel-to-add size ratio measures high-frequency market-making activity. Welfare can be hurt by the overshooting liquidity if it induces excessive speculation. Overall, the model contributes to a more comprehensive understanding and better utilization of order book data. This paper was accepted by Agostino Capponi, finance. Supplemental Material: The supplementary appendix and data files are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2023.03371 .
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bart Zhou Yueshen (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: