introducion of circuit breaker mechanism to Ashare market, intended to curb excessive volatility, has drawn mixed reactions due to its multifaceted impacts.
Positive Impacts:
The primary objective behind implementing circuit breakers was to prevent systemic risks and market panic. In a rapidly developing market like China's, where retail investors often dominate trading and sentiment can shift dramatically, sudden and sharp price declines can trigger a cascade of selloffs, leading to extreme volatility. The circuit breaker acts as an emergency brake, temporarily halting trading when prices fall to a predetermined level. This pause is designed to:
Provide a Coolingoff Period: It allows investors time to digest new information, reassess their positions, and make more rational decisions, rather than acting on impulse. This can help to temper panic selling and prevent a downward spiral fueled by fear.
Reduce Systemic Risk: By preventing sharp, uncontrolled declines, the circuit breaker aims to protect the stability of the broader financial system. Excessive market downturns can have ripple effects across the economy, impacting corporate financing, consumer confidence, and even social stability.
Enhance Market Stability and Predictability: While initially disruptive, the longterm goal is to foster a more stable and predictable trading environment. Knowing that extreme movements will be met with a temporary pause can instill a greater sense of confidence for both domestic and international investors.
Improve Information Dissemination: The pause in trading can also facilitate a more orderly dissemination of crucial information that might be driving the market fluctuations. This ensures that all participants have access to the same data before trading resumes.
Negative Impacts:
However, the circuit breaker has also faced criticism for its unintended consequences:
Amplifying Volatility on Resumption: One of the most significant criticisms is that instead of calming the market, the circuit breaker can sometimes exacerbate volatility when trading resumes. If the underlying reasons for the initial price drop remain unresolved, the market can resume its decline with renewed vigor, hitting the lower threshold even faster. This was a particular concern during its initial implementation in China.
Creating Artificial Price Floors and Ceilings: While intended to limit risk, the circuit breaker effectively creates artificial price limits, preventing legitimate price discovery. In situations where a sharp price drop might be justified by fundamental news, the breaker can delay the market's ability to accurately reflect the new reality. Similarly, in an upward trend, it can prevent further gains.
Disrupting Trading Strategies: For many market participants, particularly institutional investors and traders who rely on continuous trading to execute their strategies, the circuit breaker can be a significant impediment. It disrupts their ability to manage positions, hedge risk, or capitalize on shortterm opportunities.
Liquidity Concerns: The sudden halt in trading can also lead to temporary liquidity issues, as investors are unable to buy or sell shares during the interruption. This can be particularly problematic for large institutional trades that require substantial volume.
Purpose and Relationship to Daily Price Limits:
The purpose of the circuit breaker mechanism was not to pave the way for the cancellation of daily price limits (the 10% limit for most Ashare stocks). In fact, the two mechanisms are intended to work in conjunction. Daily price limits, which have been a longstanding feature of the Ashare market, are designed to curb excessive price movements within a single trading day. The circuit breaker, on the other hand, is a more extreme measure triggered by larger, more rapid declines that breach the daily limits, aiming to provide a more significant intervention in times of severe stress.
The introduction of circuit breakers was an attempt to layer an additional safety net onto the existing price limit system. The idea was that if the market was already hitting its daily limit, and continued selling pressure was evident, the circuit breaker would kick in to provide a more substantial pause. However, the practical experience with circuit breakers in China, particularly their impact on amplifying volatility upon resumption and disrupting trading, led to significant debate about their effectiveness and eventual recalibration or suspension in some forms. The policy was an experiment in risk management, aimed at moderating the inherent volatility of a developing market, but its implementation highlighted the complexities of designing effective market stabilization tools.