Trillionaire Term of the Day - March 11, 2009 - Uptick Rule

Uptick Rule

In order to gain any sort of understanding about the uptick rule, you need to have a basic appreciation of short selling. Short sellers bet against the success of a stock by selling stocks that they don’t own. If successful, they sell the stock at a high price and then make the payments on the shares at a lower price to cover the sale. If you’re interested in learning more about short selling, read our Term of the Day from January 26. 

The uptick rule was created in 1938 by the Securities and Exchange Commission in an attempt to stop short sellers from driving down the markets. The rule required short sellers to wait for a stock to move upward one-eighth of a percentage point before making a short trade. Before the rule was instated, traders could short a stock at any time, regardless of whether or not someone bought it long (the usual method of purchasing stocks) before them.

The SEC believed that the uptick rule would prevent short sellers from gaining momentum and driving down stock prices. This is because short sellers not only bet that a stock will go down, but the very act of selling a stock short actually moves the price downwards. When investors sell a stock short, the bid price of the stock is lowered. If many people sell short at the same time, a steep decline is very possible.

The uptick rule was successfully enforced from 1938 until June of 2007. The SEC eliminated the uptick rule to determine whether or not the rule actually had any effect on the markets. The SEC’s Office of Economic Analysis determined that the rule wasn’t necessary to prevent short sellers from manipulating the markets.

Well, now that the financial system is tanking, short sellers have been actively trading in the financial sector. Naturally, when things go bad, people start to point fingers to find out why. Many analysts have placed the blame on the elimination of the uptick rule. While the credit crisis and a basic lack of fundamentals have caused investors to sell out of financials, many argue that short sellers have driven the stocks of banks such as Citigroup (C), Bank of America (BAC), and Wells Fargo (WFC) down past appropriate levels.

The advocates of reinstating the uptick rule believe that the regulation would take away a lot of the firepower of short sellers. The shorts would have to wait for long buyers to make a purchase before making their trades. This would take away the momentum that rapidly drives stocks downwards.

People tend to look down upon short selling because it essentially involves betting on failure. Nevertheless, shorting is an important market tool that helps bring stocks down when investors become overly enthusiastic and place too much value in a stock.

There are two main arguments against reinstating the uptick rule: efficiency and freedom. The nature of the uptick rule forces short sellers to wait some time before making a purchase. It is possible for this waiting period to create some lag in the markets. Supporters of free markets dissent to almost every kind of regulation or inhibition of people’s rights. The uptick rule would be a limitation on the right to short sell.

Despite these points, it’s very difficult to argue against the uptick rule, as the stock markets functioned just fine during the 70 years in which it was upheld. It appears that its elimination will be temporary, as Representative Barney Frank of the House Financial Services Committee said yesterday that he hopes the rule will be back in effect within a month.  Part of yesterday’s rally can actually be attributed to Frank’s announcement, showing that most investors want to see the uptick rule come back. It will be very interesting to see what influence the uptick rule, if reinstated, will have on the markets, and especially on the bank stocks.

-Matt Schwartz

College Trillionaire