IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2009.06905.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Which Trading Agent is Best? Using a Threaded Parallel Simulation of a Financial Market Changes the Pecking-Order

Author

Listed:
  • Michael Rollins
  • Dave Cliff

Abstract

This paper presents novel results generated from a new simulation model of a contemporary financial market, that cast serious doubt on the previously widely accepted view of the relative performance of various well-known public-domain automated-trading algorithms. Various public-domain trading algorithms have been proposed over the past 25 years in a kind of arms-race, where each new trading algorithm was compared to the previous best, thereby establishing a "pecking order", i.e. a partially-ordered dominance hierarchy from best to worst of the various trading algorithms. Many of these algorithms were developed and tested using simple minimal simulations of financial markets that only weakly approximated the fact that real markets involve many different trading systems operating asynchronously and in parallel. In this paper we use BSE, a public-domain market simulator, to run a set of experiments generating benchmark results from several well-known trading algorithms. BSE incorporates a very simple time-sliced approach to simulating parallelism, which has obvious known weaknesses. We then alter and extend BSE to make it threaded, so that different trader algorithms operate asynchronously and in parallel: we call this simulator Threaded-BSE (TBSE). We then re-run the trader experiments on TBSE and compare the TBSE results to our earlier benchmark results from BSE. Our comparison shows that the dominance hierarchy in our more realistic experiments is different from the one given by the original simple simulator. We conclude that simulated parallelism matters a lot, and that earlier results from simple simulations comparing different trader algorithms are no longer to be entirely trusted.

Suggested Citation

  • Michael Rollins & Dave Cliff, 2020. "Which Trading Agent is Best? Using a Threaded Parallel Simulation of a Financial Market Changes the Pecking-Order," Papers 2009.06905, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2009.06905
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2009.06905
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vernon L. Smith, 1962. "An Experimental Study of Competitive Market Behavior," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 70(2), pages 111-111.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Dave Cliff, 2021. "Parameterised-Response Zero-Intelligence Traders," Papers 2103.11341, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    2. Luca Grilli & Domenico Santoro, 2022. "Forecasting financial time series with Boltzmann entropy through neural networks," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 19(4), pages 665-681, October.
    3. Colin M. Van Oort & Ethan Ratliff-Crain & Brian F. Tivnan & Safwan Wshah, 2023. "Adaptive Agents and Data Quality in Agent-Based Financial Markets," Papers 2311.15974, arXiv.org.
    4. Dave Cliff & James Hawkins & James Keen & Roberto Lau-Soto, 2021. "Implementing the BBE Agent-Based Model of a Sports-Betting Exchange," Papers 2108.02419, arXiv.org.
    5. Armand Mihai Cismaru, 2024. "DeepTraderX: Challenging Conventional Trading Strategies with Deep Learning in Multi-Threaded Market Simulations," Papers 2403.18831, arXiv.org.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Stephen Leider & William S. Lovejoy, 2016. "Bargaining in Supply Chains," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 62(10), pages 3039-3058, October.
    2. Brice Corgnet & Cary Deck & Mark Desantis & Kyle Hampton & Erik O Kimbrough, 2019. "Reconsidering Rational Expectations and the Aggregation of Diverse Information in Laboratory Security Markets," Working Papers halshs-02146611, HAL.
    3. Khalid Saeed, 2014. "Jay Forrester's operational approach to economics," System Dynamics Review, System Dynamics Society, vol. 30(4), pages 233-261, October.
    4. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List & Claire Mackevicius & Min Sok Lee & Dana Suskind, 2019. "How Can Experiments Play a Greater Role in Public Policy? 12 Proposals from an Economic Model of Scaling," Artefactual Field Experiments 00679, The Field Experiments Website.
    5. Halim, Edward & Riyanto, Yohanes Eko & Roy, Nilanjan, 2016. "Price Dynamics and Consumption Smoothing in Experimental Asset Markets," MPRA Paper 71631, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Chaudhuri, Ananish, 2016. "Misbehaving: The Making of Behavioral Economics by Richard H. Thaler, W.W. Norton and Company, New York, 2015, xvi + 415 pp., Hardcover, USD 27.95, ISBN: 978-0-393-08094-0," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 60(C), pages 64-65.
    7. John A. List, 2024. "Optimally generate policy-based evidence before scaling," Nature, Nature, vol. 626(7999), pages 491-499, February.
    8. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List, 2019. "How natural field experiments have enhanced our understanding of unemployment," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 3(1), pages 33-39, January.
    9. Marie-Claire Villeval, 2007. "Experimental Economics: Contributions, Recent Developments, and New Challenges," Working Papers 0706, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    10. Keser Claudia & Gaudeul Alexia, 2016. "Foreword: Special Issue in Honor of Reinhard Selten’s 85th Birthday," German Economic Review, De Gruyter, vol. 17(3), pages 277-283, August.
    11. Christoph Huber & Christian König-Kersting, 2022. "Experimenting with Financial Professionals," Working Papers 2022-07, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    12. Menkhaus, Dale J. & Bastian, Christopher T. & Yakunina, Alla V. & Esipov, Victor E., 1997. "Helping Russian Students See the Invisible Hand," 1997 Annual Meeting, July 13-16, 1997, Reno\ Sparks, Nevada 35755, Western Agricultural Economics Association.
    13. Crockett, Sean & Spear, Stephen & Sunder, Shyam, 2008. "Learning competitive equilibrium," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(7-8), pages 651-671, July.
    14. Leitner, Johannes & Leopold-Wildburger, Ulrike, 2011. "Experiments on forecasting behavior with several sources of information - A review of the literature," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 213(3), pages 459-469, September.
    15. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John List, 2016. "Field Experiments in Markets," Artefactual Field Experiments j0002, The Field Experiments Website.
    16. He, Haoran & Wu, Keyu, 2016. "Choice set, relative income, and inequity aversion: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 177-193.
    17. Brice Corgnet & Mark DeSantis & Christoph Siemroth, 2023. "Algorithmic Trading, Price Efficiency and Welfare: An Experimental Approach," Working Papers 2313, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    18. Roberto Savona & Maxence Soumare & Jørgen Vitting Andersen, 2015. "Financial Symmetry and Moods in the Market," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(4), pages 1-21, April.
    19. Kimbrough, Erik O. & Smyth, Andrew, 2018. "Testing the boundaries of the double auction: The effects of complete information and market power," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 372-396.
    20. Ernst Fehr & Klaus M. Schmidt, "undated". "Theories of Fairness and Reciprocity - Evidence and Economic Applications," IEW - Working Papers 075, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2009.06905. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.