ETF Market-Making Hedges Manage Risk but Do Not Usually Lock In Profit
Summary
The document examines whether ETF market makers can secure the bid–ask spread by immediately hedging trades with correlated instruments such as futures. The questioner models the spread earned in the ETF against the spread paid in the hedge and introduces a hedging-efficiency term to represent price movement between trades. This framing highlights that a tight hedge-market spread alone does not guarantee a risk-free profit: the relative prices and execution timing also matter.
An industry practitioner explains that perfect profit locking is possible only occasionally, even with fast equipment. Most of the time, market makers hedge to a risk model by trading what appears cheapest, potentially combining ETFs, individual stocks, and other products. Broader trading across many instruments lets them manage portfolio-level exposure, but leaves residual risk. A second answer describes authorized participants managing ETF shares and underlying baskets through creation and redemption, and notes that closing auctions can create cases where hedging is close to instantaneous. Less transparent ETFs add complications. The answers offer practical explanations rather than measurements of hedge performance.
Key ideas
- Hedging an ETF trade with a correlated instrument does not generally eliminate all price risk.
- A narrow spread in the hedge instrument does not by itself establish that the ETF spread is locked in.
- Market makers commonly hedge to a model and manage risk across several related securities.
- Authorized participants can exchange ETF shares against baskets of underlying securities through creation and redemption.
- Closing auctions may allow near-instantaneous hedging, while non-transparent funds complicate the process.
Tags
Full text
# ETF Market Making - Locking profits via hedging
# ETF Market Making - Locking profits via hedging
I am interested in deeply understanding the way ETF market makers operate to profit. I already know that market makers profit from buying at the bid price and selling at the ask price, and I am also aware of the creation/redemption mechanism that allows them to make a profit if the ETF value deviates too much from the NAV. What puzzles me is how they use hedging to 'instantly lock the bid ask spread profit', as I have read in many different places. For example, the following paragraph can be read in a Virtu Financial's repot - emphasis mine:
> Our strategies are also designed to lock in returns through precise and nearly instantaneous hedging, as we seek to eliminate the price risk in any positions held. Our revenue generation is driven primarily by transaction volume across a broad range of securities, asset classes and geographies. We avoid the risk of long or short positions in favor of earning small bid/ask spreads on large trading volumes across thousands of securities and other financial instruments.
By instantaneous hedging, I understand that they might be using strongly correlated products such as futures. However, what I do not understand is the fact that, if they aim at instantaneously hedging their position on ETF, they need to do a market order in the hedging product, hence paying the bid/ask spread there. Therefore, the previous paragraph only makes sense to me if the bid/ask spread of the future (for example) is smaller.
More precisely, continuing with the ETF shares and futures hedging example, the mentioned paragraph only makes sense to me if the following relation holds at least most of the time:
$$ETF_{Bid} \leq Future_{Bid} \leq Future_{Ask} \leq ETF_{Ask}$$
If this relation holds, and the market maker follows the following rule
1: If I buy the ETF at the bid price, I perform a market order to sell a future
2: If I sell the ETF at the ask price, I perform a market order to buy a future
then indeed the market maker is capable of locking returns. For example, if he buys an ETF share at time t=0 and sells it at time t=1, then \begin{align} P\&L(1) &= ETF_{Ask}(1) - ETF_{Bid}(0) + Future_{Bid}(0) - Future_{Ask}(1)\\ &= ETF_{Ask}(1) - ETF_{Bid}(1) - (Future_{Ask}(1) - Future_{Bid}(1)) + (ETF_{Bid}(1) - ETF_{Bid}(0)) - (Future_{Bid}(1)-Future_{Bid}(0)) \end{align} The first two terms represent the ETF Bid/Ask spread vs. the future Bid/Ask spread, whereas the second two terms gauge the hedging efficiency (HE)
Using the above-mentioned relation, it can be easily seen that
$$ETF_{Ask}(0) \geq + Future_{Bid}(0) \geq ETF_{Bid}(0)$$
$$-ETF_{Bid}(1) \geq -Future_{Bid}(1) \geq -ETF_{Ask}(1)$$
Hence,
$$ ETF_{Ask}(0) - ETF_{Bid}(0) \geq HE \geq -(ETF_{Ask}(1)-ETF_{Bid}(1))$$
Thus, assuming that the hedging efficiency is on average 0 (and, when different from 0, very small and little risky), under this hypothesis the market maker can only make profit on average and with little risk by instantaneous hedging techniques if the mention realtion holds.
I know this is an oversimplified example, but is this roughly how this instantaneous hedging thing works? I.e., using the fact that the hedging instrument has a tighter bid/ask spread.
If this is not the case, I would very much appreaciate a precise explanation/bibliography to understand what they exactly refer to.
Thanks in advance!
## Answer by JoshK (score 2, accepted)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/60549
I've worked in this industry for a while and have run ETF market making for quite a few years. It's very difficult to perfectly lock in profit as you detailed above. With fast equipment it can be done sometimes.
But most of the time you really are just hedging to model - and there is risk in that case. For example, you might sell ETF X and then hedge buy buying what looks cheapest, in this case stocks A,B,E. The trick is the scale. As you trade more and more products you are able to hedge through a more holistic view of the risk. You might sell QQQ, buy SPY, and then sell a few higher beta tech names, for example.
## Answer by Sergei Rodionov (score 0)
https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/60575
An ETF typically appoints one or multiple Authorized Participants (aka APs) which are allowed to buy and redeem ETF shares directly with the fund, by exchanging the fund shares against a basket of the underlying securities. These APs are often the market makers and their arbitrage involves managing an inventory of underlying securities and fund shares. I can think of one case where such hedging would be close to 'instantaneous' - closing auctions.
The non-transparent ETFs (instanceOf Precidian) introduce specific challenges into the market making process since the fund composition is supposed to be unknown and creation/redemption process is more complicated.Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)
This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.