What Is After-Hours Trading?

After-hours trading is securities trading that starts at 4 p.m. U.S. Eastern Time after the major U.S. stock exchanges close. The after-hours trading session can run as late as 8 p.m., though volume typically thins out much earlier in the session. Trading in the after hours is conducted through electronic communication networks (ECNs).

Understanding After-Hours Trading

Traders and investors engage in after-hours trading for a variety of reasons. They may prefer trading with fewer market participants or their schedules may require it. They may want to take positions as a result of news that breaks after the close of the stock exchange. Or, they may want to close out a position before they leave on vacation.

Generally, after-hours trading refers to trading that takes place after normal market hours and up until about 8 pm. Premarket trading refers to trading that takes place before the start of normal market hours, generally from 7 a.m. until 9:25 a.m. Together, after-hours trading and premarket trading are referred to as extended-hours trading.

The precise times of extended-hours trading can depend on the ECN an investor uses or the financial institution where they place their orders. For instance, Wells Fargo allows after-hours trading from 4:05 p.m. ET until just 5 p.m.

Electronic markets (or ECNs) used in after-hours trading automatically attempt to match up buy and sell orders. If they can do so, trades are completed. If they can’t, trades remain unfilled.

After-hours trading typically only allows limit orders to buy, sell, or short, although a particular brokerage may be less restrictive. No stop, stop-limit, or orders with special instructions (such as fill or kill or all or none) are accepted. Moreover, orders are normally only good for the after-hours trading session in which they’re placed.

The maximum share amount per order is 25,000.

Quotes provided are limited to those available through the electronic market used. Investors may have access to other participating ECNs but it isn’t guaranteed.

Volume

In after-hours trading, the trading volume for a stock may spike on the initial release of news but most of the time thins out as the session progresses. The growth of volume generally slows significantly by 6 p.m. So, there is a substantial risk that investors will be trading illiquid stocks after-hours. 

Price

Not only does volume sometimes come at a premium in the after-hours trading sessions, so does price. It is not unusual for the spreads to be wide in the after-hours. The spread is the difference between the bid and the ask prices. Due to fewer shares trading, the spread may be significantly wider than during the normal trading session.

Participation

If liquidity and prices weren’t enough to make after-hours trading risky, the lack of participants may do the trick. That’s why certain investors and institutions may choose not to participate in after-hours trading, regardless of news or events.

It’s quite possible for a stock to fall sharply in the after hours only to rise once the regular trading session resumes the next day at 9:30 a.m. Many big institutional investors have a certain view of price action during after-hours trading sessions and express that view with their trades once the regular market re-opens.

Since volume is thin and spreads are wide in after-hours trading, it is much easier to push prices higher or lower. Fewer shares and trades are needed to make a substantial impact on a stock’s price. That’s why after-hours orders usually are restricted to limit orders. If your brokerage doesn’t restrict them, consider them anyway as a means to protect yourself from unexpected price swings and order fills.

Standard Trading vs. After-Hours Trading

What Are Affiliated Companies?

Companies are affiliated when one company is a minority shareholder of another. In most cases, the parent company will own less than a 50% interest in its affiliated company. Two companies may also be affiliated if they are controlled by a separate third party. In the business world, affiliated companies are often simply called affiliates.

The term is sometimes used to refer to companies that are related to each other in some way. For example, Bank of America has many different affiliated companies including Bank of America, U.S. Trust, Landsafe, Balboa, and Merrill Lynch.

Companies may be affiliated with one another to get into a new market, to maintain separate brand identities, to raise capital without affecting the parent or other companies, and to save on taxes. In most cases, affiliates are associates or associated companies, which describes an organization whose parent has a minority stake in it.

Understanding Affiliated Companies

There are several ways companies can become affiliated. A company may decide to buy out or take over another one, or it may decide to spin off a portion of its operations into a new affiliate altogether. In either case, the parent company generally keeps its operations separate from its affiliates. Since the parent company has a minority ownership, its liability is limited, and the two companies keep separate management teams.

Affiliates are a common way for parent businesses to enter foreign markets while keeping a minority interest in a business. This is especially important if the parent wants to shake off its majority stake in the affiliate.

There is no single bright-line test to determine if one company is affiliated with another. In fact, the criteria for affiliation changes from country to country, state to state, and even between regulatory bodies. For instance, companies considered affiliates by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) may not be considered affiliated by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Affiliates Versus Subsidiaries

An affiliate is different from a subsidiary, of which the parent owns more than 50%. In a subsidiary, the parent is a majority shareholder, which gives the parent company’s management and shareholders voting rights. Subsidiary financials may also appear on the parent company’s financial sheets.

But subsidiaries remain separate legal entities from their parents, meaning they are liable for their own taxes, liabilities, and governance. They are also responsible for following the laws and regulations where they are headquartered, especially if they operate in a different jurisdiction from the parent company.

An example of a subsidiary is the relationship between the Walt Disney Corporation and sports network ESPN. Disney owns an 80% interest in ESPN, making it a majority shareholder. ESPN is its subsidiary.

SEC Rules Surrounding Affiliates

Securities markets around the world have rules that concern affiliates of the businesses they regulate. Here again, these are complex rules that need to be analyzed by local experts on a case-by-case basis. Examples of rules enforced by the SEC include:

• Rule 102 of Regulation M prohibits issuers, selling security holders, and their affiliated purchasers from bidding for, purchasing, or attempting to induce any person to bid for or purchase, any security which is the subject of a distribution until after an applicable restricted period has passed.
• Before disclosing nonpublic personal information about a consumer to a nonaffiliated third party, a broker-dealer must first give a consumer an opt-out notice and a reasonable opportunity to opt out of the disclosure.
• Broker-dealers must maintain and preserve certain information regarding those affiliates, subsidiaries, and holding companies whose business activities are reasonably likely to have a material impact on their own finances and operations.

Tax Consequences of Affiliates

In nearly all jurisdictions, there are important tax consequences for affiliated companies. In general, tax credits and deductions are limited to one affiliate in a group, or a ceiling is imposed on the tax benefits that affiliates may reap under certain programs.

Determining whether companies in a group are affiliates, subsidiaries, or associates is done through a case-by-case analysis by local tax experts.

What Is Adverse Selection?

Adverse selection refers generally to a situation in which sellers have information that buyers do not have, or vice versa, about some aspect of product quality. In other words, it is a case where asymmetric information is exploited. Asymmetric information, also called information failure, happens when one party to a transaction has greater material knowledge than the other party.

Typically, the more knowledgeable party is the seller. Symmetric information is when both parties have equal knowledge.

In the case of insurance, adverse selection is the tendency of those in dangerous jobs or high-risk lifestyles to purchase products like life insurance. In these cases, it is the buyer who actually has more knowledge (i.e., about their health). To fight adverse selection, insurance companies reduce exposure to large claims by limiting coverage or raising premiums.

Understanding Adverse Selection

Adverse selection occurs when one party in a negotiation has relevant information the other party lacks. The asymmetry of information often leads to making bad decisions, such as doing more business with less profitable or riskier market segments.

In the case of insurance, avoiding adverse selection requires identifying groups of people more at risk than the general population and charging them more money. For example, life insurance companies go through underwriting when evaluating whether to give an applicant a policy and what premium to charge.

Underwriters typically evaluate an applicant’s height, weight, current health, medical history, family history, occupation, hobbies, driving record, and lifestyle risks such as smoking; all these issues impact an applicant’s health and the company’s potential for paying a claim. The insurance company then determines whether to give the applicant a policy and what premium to charge for taking on that risk.

Consequences of Adverse Selection

A seller may have better information than a buyer about products and services being offered, putting the buyer at a disadvantage in the transaction. For example, a company’s managers may more willingly issue shares when they know the share price is overvalued compared to the real value; buyers can end up buying overvalued shares and lose money. In the secondhand car market, a seller may know about a vehicle’s defect and charge the buyer more without disclosing the issue.

The general consequence of adverse selection is that it increases costs since consumers lack information held by sellers or producers, creating an asymmetry in the market. This can also lower consumption as buyers may be wary of the quality of the products that are offered for sale. Or, it may exclude certain consumers that do not have access to or cannot afford to obtain information that could lead them to make better buying decisions.

One indirect effect of this is a negative impact on consumers’ health and well-being. If you buy a faulty product or dangerous medication because you don’t have good information, consuming these products can cause physical harm. Or, by refraining from buying certain healthcare products (e.g., vaccines), consumers may wrongly judge a safe intervention as overly risky.

Adverse Selection in Insurance

Because of adverse selection, insurers find that high-risk people are more willing to take out and pay greater premiums for policies. If the company charges an average price but only high-risk consumers buy, the company takes a financial loss by paying out more benefits or claims.

However, by increasing premiums for high-risk policyholders, the company has more money with which to pay those benefits. For example, a life insurance company charges higher premiums for race car drivers. A car insurance company charges more for customers living in high-crime areas. A health insurance company charges higher premiums for customers who smoke. In contrast, customers who do not engage in risky behaviors are less likely to pay for insurance due to increasing policy costs.

A prime example of adverse selection in regard to life or health insurance coverage is a smoker who successfully manages to obtain insurance coverage as a nonsmoker. Smoking is a key identified risk factor for life insurance or health insurance, so a smoker must pay higher premiums to obtain the same coverage level as a nonsmoker. By concealing their behavioral choice to smoke, an applicant is leading the insurance company to make decisions on coverage or premium costs that are adverse to the insurance company’s management of financial risk.

Another example of adverse selection in the case of auto insurance would be a situation where the applicant obtains insurance coverage based on providing a residence address in an area with a very low crime rate when the applicant actually lives in an area with a very high crime rate. Obviously, the risk of the applicant’s vehicle being stolen, vandalized, or otherwise damaged when regularly parked in a high-crime area is substantially greater than if the vehicle was regularly parked in a low-crime area.

How to Minimize Adverse Selection

Adverse selection by increasing access to information, thus minimizing asymmetries. For consumers, the internet has greatly increased access while reducing costs. Crowdsourced information in the form of user reviews along with more formal reviews by bloggers or specialist websites are often free and warn potential buyers about otherwise obscure issues around quality.

Warranties and guarantees offered by sellers can also help, allowing consumers to use a product risk-free for a certain period to see if it has flaws or quality issues and the ability to return them without consequence if there are issues. Laws and regulations can also help, such as Lemon Laws in the used car industry. Federal regulatory authorities such as the FDA also help ensure that products are safe and effective for consumers.

Insurers reduce adverse selection by requesting medical information from applicants in the form of requiring paramedical examinations, querying doctors’ offices for medical records, and looking at one’s family history. This gives the insurance company more information that an applicant may fail to disclose on their own.

Moral Hazard vs. Adverse Selection

Like adverse selection, moral hazard occurs when there is asymmetric information between two parties, but where a change in the behavior of one party is exposed after a deal is struck. Adverse selection occurs when there’s a lack of symmetric information prior to a deal between a buyer and a seller.

Moral hazard is the risk that one party has not entered into the contract in good faith or has provided false details about its assets, liabilities, or credit capacity. For instance, in the investment banking sector, it may become known that government regulatory bodies will bail out failing banks; as a result, bank employees may take on excessive amounts of risk to score lucrative bonuses knowing that if their risky bets do not pan out, the bank will be saved anyhow.

The Lemons Problem

The lemons problem refers to issues that arise regarding the value of an investment or product due to asymmetric information possessed by the buyer and the seller.

The lemons problem was put forward in a research paper, “The Market for ‘Lemons’: Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism,” written in the late 1960s by George A. Akerlof, an economist and professor at the University of California, Berkeley. The tag phrase identifying the problem came from the example of used cars Akerlof used to illustrate the concept of asymmetric information, as defective used cars are commonly referred to as lemons. The takeaway is that due to adverse selection, the only used cars left on the market will ultimately be lemons.

The lemons problem exists in the marketplace for both consumer and business products, and also in the arena of investing, related to the disparity in the perceived value of an investment between buyers and sellers. The lemons problem is also prevalent in financial sector areas, including insurance and credit markets. For example, in the realm of corporate finance, a lender has asymmetrical and less-than-ideal information regarding the actual creditworthiness of a borrower.

The Bottom Line

Contrary to assumptions made by mainstream economic and financial models, information is not symmetrically accessible and available to all actors in a market. In particular, sellers and producers often have far more information about what they are selling than do buyers. This information asymmetry can lead to market inefficiencies via what is known as adverse selection. In insurance markets, applicants have more information about themselves than do insurers, meaning that they withhold key information about being higher-risk.