arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 0904.4131q-fin.TRq-fin.ST
收藏

在微观市场模型中执行大额订单

Executing large orders in a microscopic market model

Alexander Weiss

摘要:

在最近的一篇论文中,Alfonsi,Fruth和Schied(AFS)提出了一个简单的基于订单簿的模型,用于大订单对股票价格的影响。他们使用这个模型来获得执行大订单的最佳策略。我们将这些策略应用于最近由Bovier,Černovi和Hryniv提出的基于代理的随机订单簿模型,但已经校准失败。特别是,从我们的模拟市场的恢复速度后,一个大的订单显然是依赖于订单的大小,而AFS模型假设一个恒定的速度。为此,我们提出了一个推广的AFS模型,GAFS模型,将这种依赖关系,并证明了最优的投资策略。作为推论,我们发现,我们可以从GAFS模型中推导出AFS模型的“正确”的恒定弹性速度,使得AFS和GAFS模型的最优策略一致。最后,我们表明,GAFS模型的人工市场环境中应用的最优策略的成本仍然显着不同的模型预测,表明即使是改进的模型并没有捕捉到所有的相关细节的真实市场。

英文摘要:

In a recent paper, Alfonsi, Fruth and Schied (AFS) propose a simple order book based model for the impact of large orders on stock prices. They use this model to derive optimal strategies for the execution of large orders. We apply these strategies to an agent-based stochastic order book model that was recently proposed by Bovier, Černý and Hryniv, but already the calibration fails. In particular, from our simulations the recovery speed of the market after a large order is clearly dependent on the order size, whereas the AFS model assumes a constant speed. For this reason, we propose a generalization of the AFS model, the GAFS model, that incorporates this dependency, and prove the optimal investment strategies. As a corollary, we find that we can derive the ``correct'' constant resilience speed for the AFS model from the GAFS model such that the optimal strategies of the AFS and the GAFS model coincide. Finally, we show that the costs of applying the optimal strategies of the GAFS model to the artificial market environment still differ significantly from the model predictions, indicating that even the improved model does not capture all of the relevant details of a real market.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑