Extending an empirical technique developed in Easley,
Kiefer, and O'Hara (1996), (1997a), we examine
different hypotheses about stock splits. In line
with the trading range hypothesis, we find that
stock splits attract uninformed traders. However, we
also find that informed trading increases, resulting
in no appreciable change in the information content
of trades. Therefore, we do not find evidence
consistent with the hypothesis that stock splits
reduce information asymmetries. The optimal tick
size hypothesis predicts that stock splits attract
limit order trading and this enhances the execution
quality of trades. While we find an increase in the
number of executed limit orders, their effect is
overshadowed by the increase in the costs of
executing market orders due to the larger percentage
spreads. On balance, the uninformed investors'
overall trading costs rise after stock splits.