Legalizing Insider Trading, With a Catch
Following up on Felix's case for why insider trading should be illegal, allow me to paraphrase another argument along those lines:
Imagine four types of investors:
- noise - those who trade on information they believe to be good, but is actually wrong (a large chunk of us)
- insider - those with intimate knowledge of the workings of a firm
- information - those who invest in finding information about firms (e.g. analysts)
- liquidity - buy and hold-type investors who don't care about the real economics of a firm. This group is likely to buy indexes of stocks. (another sizable group)
The tension among these four is between insider and information traders.
Let's say an insider sells some stocks. An information trader, not knowing the source of the transaction, will think that the stock is now undervalued so he/she will go long. Once the information that the insider traded on reaches the market, the info trader is toast. In the long run (and in the extreme), insider trading drives information traders out of the market.
What's wrong with this scenario?
The best argument is that insiders have the information but they may not be the one's best able to take advantage of it. The reason for this is that insiders are likely to only concentrate on their own business, or possibly their own sector, but not general economic forces. When information is made available to everyone at the same time, there is competition to get the most value out of it. And we know how much everybody likes competition.
As for noise and liquidity traders, the former aren't hurt one way or another by this dynamic. But the presence of info traders provides liquidity to the latter group.
Perhaps one solution could be to legalize all types of insider trading but with the stipulation that each and every transaction be made public. That way, insiders can attempt to both profit from and signal their information to the market.
- Mortgage Fraud Redux
- May 16 2008 8:05PM EDT
- When Superpowers Prop Up Governments
- May 16 2008 4:40PM EDT
- Chart of the Day: Baseball Ex-Steroids
- May 15 2008 1:26PM EDT
- Bubble Poppers
- May 14 2008 9:36PM EDT
- Quantifying Mortgage Fraud
- May 13 2008 6:32PM EDT
- Chart of the Day: The Worst Is Over
- May 13 2008 11:15AM EDT
- Is Text Messaging a Rip-Off?
- May 12 2008 5:37PM EDT
- Legalizing Insider Trading, With a Catch
- May 9 2008 5:34PM EDT
- Real Housewives of NYC -- A Lot of Them
- May 8 2008 7:10PM EDT
- When Envy Trumps Ambition
- May 7 2008 8:29AM EDT
- Achieving Universal Coverage at No Extra Cost
- May 1 2008 11:19AM EDT
- Gambling Strategies: Always Bet on White (Referees)
- Apr 30 2008 10:10PM EDT
- Unanswered Questions: To Pause or Not to Pause?
- Apr 30 2008 3:39PM EDT
- Grim Budget Outlook Forces Treasury to Bring Back 1-Year Bill
- Apr 30 2008 11:58AM EDT
- Does It Make Sense to Buy Forever Stamps?
- Apr 29 2008 9:58PM EDT
Archive
May 2008
Categories
- advertising
- aging
- altruism
- art
- baseball
- basketball
- behavior
- books
- business cycles
- charts
- compensation
- crime
- derivatives
- drugs
- education
- elections
- ethics
- finance
- football
- foreign exchange
- gambling
- gender
- globalization
- golf
- growth
- happiness
- health care
- history
- incentives
- inequality
- interactive
- intolerance
- investing
- jobs
- marriage
- media
- monetary policy
- movies
- music
- obesity
- painting
- politics
- population
- prediction markets
- privacy
- psychology
- racism
- random
- real estate
- religion
- roundup
- sex
- spending
- sports
- taxes
- trade
- war
Links
- Email me

- Bluematter

- Decision Science News

- Economist's View

- EconTalk

- EconPapers

- Freakonomics

- Geary Behaviour Centre

- Institute for the Study of Labor

- Journal of Interest

- Marginal Revolution

- MoneyScience

- NBER Working Papers

- New York Federal Reserve Research

- Research Recap

- Social Science Research Network

- Social Science Statistics Blog

- Statistical Modeling, Causal Inference, and Social Science

- Unconventional Wisdom

- VoxEU





