• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
MENUMENU
  • Home
  • About Us
    • Our Philosophy
    • Choosing a Financial Planner
    • Legal and Regulatory
    • Team
    • Careers
    • Awards & Recognition
    • Contact Us
  • Our Services
    • Financial Planning
    • Ongoing Financial Guidance
    • Portfolio Management
  • Financial Planning Basics
    • Continuing Care Retirement Communities (CCRCs)
    • Retirement Planning and Cash Flow
    • Social Security
    • Taxes
    • Insurance & Risk Management
    • Investments
    • 401(k)
    • Real Estate
    • College
    • Liquidity
    • Divorce
    • Estate Planning
    • Sensible Updates
  • Resources
    • Blog
    • Financial Planning for Older Adults
    • Webinars
    • Videos
    • Financial Planning Guidebook
    • Continuing Care Retirement Communities Guidebook
    • Primers
    • Financial Planning Links
    • Client Login
  • Contact Us
Sensible Financial Planning

Sensible Financial Planning

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter
Client Login

Call Us Today
781-642-0890

Market Impact, Dark Pools, Payment for Order Flow, and You (part 2)

by
Chris Andrysiak
MBA, CFP® - Senior Financial Advisor and Senior Director of Strategy

March 29, 2021

In part one of this series, I gave an overview of market impact, dark pools, and payment for order flow. In part two, I will discuss how these things affect you. For those looking for the conclusion, here it is. It is very hard to know precisely how much, if anything, payment for order flow is costing you. However, the way Sensible Financial manages money makes those costs immaterial. Why do we say that?

Payment for order flow and market impact might affect Sensible Financial clients in two ways. The direct effect is if ETF trades cost more than they would otherwise (payment for order flow does not affect mutual fund trades). The indirect effect is if payment for order flow and market impact hurt the performance of mutual funds and exchange traded funds our clients use.    

What is the direct cost of payment for order flow?

One of the larger asset managers has studied the direct effect. They found that investors who are not able to negotiate special arrangements with brokers (“retail” investors like our clients), paid more and earned fewer proceeds for trades. The difference is the amount the broker received in payment for order flow (PFOF).

There are other views on this, however. Some say brokers send trades to certain venues where there is “price improvement”. This occurs when a trading venue executes a trade at a price better (for the investor) than what is required. In some cases, the trading venue pays the broker for sending them that trade. Since the investor benefits from a better price, they’re not concerned if their broker also benefits. 

Other observers say that payment for order flow merely changes how investors pay. Previously, they paid trading commissions to their broker. Now, many trades are free, but the trading venue pays the broker, and perhaps the price to the investor is a bit worse. It is less transparent than it used to be, but PFOF should be seen in the context of a “free” trade that used to cost $4.99, $9.99, or $14.99. 

It is hard to reconcile these different points of view, and, as described in my previous article, the analysis is difficult. However, if we go back to the worst-case view that says that investors are paying more by the amount that their broker is receiving in PFOF, we can then try to determine how much that is. Fortunately, the SEC has disclosure requirements for brokers that allow us to calculate that cost. For instance, required disclosures show that TD Ameritrade, one of the firms our clients use for custody and brokerage, received an average of 12 cents per 100 shares traded in PFOF in Q4 2020. That is an estimate of how much it costs a client that uses TD Ameritrade for custody and brokerage. Because Sensible Financial’s philosophy is that it is better for you if we do not trade frequently, these 12 cents per 100 shares traded turns out to cost not very much at all.

We reviewed the 2019 trading records of 50 randomly selected Sensible Financial clients. During 2019, the sample clients traded 5,287 ETF shares, on average. For that amount of trading volume, TD Ameritrade received $6.34 in payment for order flow. So, ignoring the possible benefits of price improvement and no-commission trades, the average cost for each of these 50 clients was $6.34 in 2019. The number of trades varies by year, depending on how volatile the markets are, but even for years that are more volatile than 2019, these trading costs are extremely low (much less than one basis point).

Are there indirect costs of payment for order flow and market impact?

Let us now move to the second possible effect of market impact and payment for order flow, the indirect cost. Is the performance of the mutual funds and ETFs we use for our clients hurt by these things? The answers are yes – any manager buying and selling large blocks of stock (like mutual funds and ETFs do) is affected by market impact, which is why alternate trading venues exist, and maybe – mutual funds and ETFs may be affected by payment for order flow. However, we are not terribly concerned about these indirect effects, for the following reasons. 

The mutual funds and ETFs that Sensible Financial recommends are managed by large companies such as Vanguard, Fidelity, State Street Global Advisors, Barclays, and Dimensional Fund Advisors. These firms have their own trading desks, meaning they are very much in touch with the markets. They trade huge volumes of stock every day, and they have sophisticated trading analytics departments to help them find the best prices. Their market power enables them to negotiate good pricing with the trading venues and brokers. In sum, they have the volume and data to manage trading costs.

They also are motivated to do so. Investors choose specific mutual funds and ETFs based largely on performance or, in the case of index funds, how closely they track their index. Millions of dollars of management fees are dependent on fund performance, and market impact and trading costs influence fund performance. These companies are strongly motivated to keep trading costs low. 

Further, the SEC tightly regulates arrangements where a mutual fund manager might benefit from costs that are paid by a mutual fund it is managing. These regulations limit the extent to which companies like Fidelity or Vanguard could benefit by accepting trading arrangements that cost their mutual funds more. 

So, although it is true that mutual fund and ETF investors bear costs from market impact, and possibly from payment for order flow, the managers are well equipped and strongly motivated to manage and limit these costs, and the SEC has regulations in place to limit abuses. 

Sensible Financial is not too concerned about market impact and PFOF costs for the mutual funds and ETFs it uses for one additional reason. We use passively managed funds, which trade much less often than the typical actively managed mutual fund. The largest passively managed funds have a turnover ratio (a measure of how much trading is done) of 5% or less. The largest actively managed funds have turnover ratios in the 25% to 50% range, or even higher, five to ten times as high as passively managed funds. So even though all large mutual funds and ETFs suffer from market impact and trading costs, the funds Sensible Financial uses are affected to a much smaller extent by these costs.

In summary, how do market impact and payment for order flow affect Sensible Financial clients?

To summarize, we conclude that ETF trades made for our clients may cost more because of payment for order flow, but if they do, the amounts are so small as to be inconsequential because we trade very little. Benefits such as no-commission trades or price improvement may also offset these costs. Mutual funds and ETFs certainly have costs of market impact and other trading costs, and those costs do erode returns. However, mutual fund and ETF managers are well equipped to manage these costs and are strongly motivated to do so. Further, the types of mutual funds and ETFs that Sensible Financial uses trade very little and so the costs should be quite small. 

Please contact your advisor if you have questions. 

Photo by Chris Liverani on Unsplash

More articles by Chris Andrysiak Filed Under: Investments Tagged With: dark pools, Investments, market impact, payment for order flow

Primary Sidebar

Sign up for our newsletter

Recent Posts

The picture shows a college campus and students because the article is about FAFSA.

The FAFSA Simplification Act and Financial Aid

The FAFSA Simplification Act makes adjustments to the FAFSA. How will it affect your college student and their financial aid?

The picture shows an older couple hiking on a beautiful day to represent retirement and the SECURE Act.

The SECURE Act 2.0 and Retirement

The SECURE Act 2.0 builds on the initial SECURE Act of 2019, changing the retirement planning space, and increasing retirement flexibility.

Categories

  • College Planning
  • Cybersecurity
  • Estate Planning
  • Financial Planning Basics
  • Financial Planning Videos
  • Insurance & Risk Management
  • Investments
  • Retirement Planning and Cash Flow
  • Sensible Updates

Topics

401(k) Annuities bond returns Bonds Charitable Giving College Planning Company Updates Credit Health Disability Insurance diversification Divorce Donor Advised Funds Economy estate planning Federal Reserve Financial Goals Financial IQ financial planning Financial Strategy Forbes.com housing inflation Investments Investment Strategy IRA Legislation Liquidity Long-Term Care Medicare Mortgage Older Adult Living Recommended Books remote work Retirement Choices retirement planning Retirement Savings Risk Management Securities Social Security Social Security benefits Staff News Stock Market Stocks sustainable portfolios taxes

authors

Rick Miller
Sensible Staff
Frank Napolitano
Rick Fine
Josh Trubow
Chris Andrysiak
Marie St. Clare
Laura Williams
Gyb Spilsbury
Chuck Luce
Aimee Plouffe Polley

Footer

Services

  • Financial Planning
  • Financial Guidance
  • Portfolio Management

About Us

  • Our Philosophy
  • Team

Resources

  • Blog
  • Financial Planning Guidebook
Sign up for our Newsletter
Awards & Recognition

Follow Us

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Locations

Massachusetts

203 Crescent Street, Suite 404

Waltham, MA 02453

Phone: (781) 642-0890
Fax: (781) 810-4830

 

California

600 B Street, Suite 300

San Diego, CA 92101

Phone: (619) 573-4131​

Disclaimer

This content reflects the opinions of Sensible Financial®. We may change it at any time without notice. We provide this content for informational purposes only. Although we endeavor to keep the information up-to-date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability for a particular purpose or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose. We do not intend the information contained in this website as investment advice and we do not recommend that you buy or sell any security. We do not guarantee that our statements, opinions or forecasts will prove to be correct. Past performance does not guarantee future results. You cannot invest directly in any index. If you attempt to mimic the performance of an index, you will incur fees and expenses which will reduce returns. All investing involves risk. You can lose any money you invest. There is no guarantee that any investment plan or strategy will succeed.

More important additional information and full disclaimer.

Copyright © 2023 Sensible Financial · All Rights Are Reserved
Legal Disclosure