How credible is the suggestion that specific parties distort price discovery (rig the market) of a given asset by buying/selling corresponding futures contracts or any other derivatives.

Should these position not unwind at some point causing a reversal effect?


Can futures buying/selling distort price discovery?

Yes, that is plausible although will not necessarily be the case. I will focus on put & call options.

Consider the put-call parity, which I rewrite as


where S denotes the stock [price], P put, C call, and K the strike price.

Buying enough call options will increase C. If that were the only change in the market (regarding this stock), that would "break" the put-call parity and therefore an arbitrage opportunity would ensue.

Since K is fixed, the only possible changes to offset C's increase are an increase of P and/or of S. An agent who notices C going up is likely to interpret that someone else has information in the sense that S will go up.

Unless that agent also has information in the opposite direction, it would be irrational for him to buy P in his attempt to take advantage of the arbitrage opportunity. Thus, he is likelier to buy S instead of P at least while the put-call parity is restored. Buying S tends increase its price (as is the case with any financial instrument).

Similarly, in the event of C's increase, the agent might set up a strategy that consists of taking a short position on C and hedge it by taking a long position on S (he might have to borrow because C<S, but that is irrelevant to the point). Opening that long position tends to increase S.

| improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Can you comment on short vs long term effect? Especially with regard to my last sentence? $\endgroup$ – Frank Rem Feb 11 '19 at 9:15
  • $\begingroup$ @FrankRem Reversal/unwinding effects are hard to foretell, more so in the long term. But if buying C causes enough increase in S, then exercising in-the-money Calls at expiry cannot push S down: to the extent that the seller of these options shall honor its obligation, the demand of S is non-decreasing. If buying P brings S down, the effect (on S) of exercising ITM Puts at expiry may depend on whether the options buyer owns stock to deliver them when exercising his Puts. Subsequent reversals and/or contagions depend on the new stockowner's pace & timing for transacting S. $\endgroup$ – Iñaki Viggers Feb 11 '19 at 11:21

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.