IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2103.00600.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Time Matters: Exploring the Effects of Urgency and Reaction Speed in Automated Traders

Author

Listed:
  • Henry Hanifan
  • Ben Watson
  • John Cartlidge
  • Dave Cliff

Abstract

We consider issues of time in automated trading strategies in simulated financial markets containing a single exchange with public limit order book and continuous double auction matching. In particular, we explore two effects: (i) reaction speed - the time taken for trading strategies to calculate a response to market events; and (ii) trading urgency - the sensitivity of trading strategies to approaching deadlines. Much of the literature on trading agents focuses on optimising pricing strategies only and ignores the effects of time, while real-world markets continue to experience a race to zero latency, as automated trading systems compete to quickly access information and act in the market ahead of others. We demonstrate that modelling reaction speed can significantly alter previously published results, with simple strategies such as SHVR outperforming more complex adaptive algorithms such as AA. We also show that adding a pace parameter to ZIP traders (ZIP-Pace, or ZIPP) can create a sense of urgency that significantly improves profitability.

Suggested Citation

  • Henry Hanifan & Ben Watson & John Cartlidge & Dave Cliff, 2021. "Time Matters: Exploring the Effects of Urgency and Reaction Speed in Automated Traders," Papers 2103.00600, arXiv.org.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2103.00600
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2103.00600
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Vulkan, Nir & Roth, Alvin E. & Neeman, Zvika (ed.), 2013. "The Handbook of Market Design," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780199570515.
    2. Rust, John & Miller, John H. & Palmer, Richard, 1994. "Characterizing effective trading strategies : Insights from a computerized double auction tournament," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 18(1), pages 61-96, January.
    3. Álvaro Cartea & Ryan Donnelly & Sebastian Jaimungal, 2018. "Enhancing trading strategies with order book signals," Applied Mathematical Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(1), pages 1-35, January.
    4. Gjerstad, Steven & Dickhaut, John, 1998. "Price Formation in Double Auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-29, January.
    5. Gode, Dhananjay K & Sunder, Shyam, 1993. "Allocative Efficiency of Markets with Zero-Intelligence Traders: Market as a Partial Substitute for Individual Rationality," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 101(1), pages 119-137, February.
    6. 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.
    7. Steven Gjerstad, 2003. "The Strategic Impact of Pace in Double Auction Bargaining," Microeconomics 0304001, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    8. Bradley Miles & Dave Cliff, 2019. "A Cloud-Native Globally Distributed Financial Exchange Simulator for Studying Real-World Trading-Latency Issues at Planetary Scale," Papers 1909.12926, arXiv.org.
    9. Henry Hanifan & John Cartlidge, 2019. "Fools Rush In: Competitive Effects of Reaction Time in Automated Trading," Papers 1912.02775, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    10. Frank McGroarty & Ash Booth & Enrico Gerding & V. L. Raju Chinthalapati, 2019. "High frequency trading strategies, market fragility and price spikes: an agent based model perspective," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 282(1), pages 217-244, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Henry Hanifan & John Cartlidge, 2019. "Fools Rush In: Competitive Effects of Reaction Time in Automated Trading," Papers 1912.02775, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    2. Tai, Chung-Ching & Chen, Shu-Heng & Yang, Lee-Xieng, 2018. "Cognitive ability and earnings performance: Evidence from double auction market experiments," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 409-440.
    3. Dave Cliff, 2021. "BBE: Simulating the Microstructural Dynamics of an In-Play Betting Exchange via Agent-Based Modelling," Papers 2105.08310, arXiv.org.
    4. Zhan, Wenjie & Friedman, Daniel, 2007. "Markups in double auction markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(9), pages 2984-3005, September.
    5. Carsten Schmidt & Jens Grossklags, 2004. "Interaction of Human and Artificial Agents on Double Auction Markets - Simulations and Laboratory Experiments," Papers on Strategic Interaction 2003-22, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Strategic Interaction Group.
    6. Itzhak Rasooly, 2022. "Competitive equilibrium and the double auction," Economics Series Working Papers 974, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
    7. Sabiou M. Inoua & Vernon L. Smith, 2022. "Perishable goods versus re-tradable assets: A theoretical reappraisal of a fundamental dichotomy," Chapters, in: Sascha Füllbrunn & Ernan Haruvy (ed.), Handbook of Experimental Finance, chapter 15, pages 162-171, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    8. Aaron Wray & Matthew Meades & Dave Cliff, 2020. "Automated Creation of a High-Performing Algorithmic Trader via Deep Learning on Level-2 Limit Order Book Data," Papers 2012.00821, arXiv.org.
    9. Jakob Grazzini, 2013. "Information dissemination in an experimentally based agent-based stock market," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 8(1), pages 179-209, April.
    10. Gjerstad, Steven & Dickhaut, John, 1998. "Price Formation in Double Auctions," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 22(1), pages 1-29, January.
    11. Jason Shachat & Zhenxuan Zhang, 2017. "The Hayek Hypothesis and Long‐run Competitive Equilibrium: An Experimental Investigation," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 127(599), pages 199-228, February.
    12. Chen, Shu-Heng, 2012. "Varieties of agents in agent-based computational economics: A historical and an interdisciplinary perspective," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-25.
    13. Brewer, Paul & Ratan, Anmol, 2019. "Profitability, efficiency, and inequality in double auction markets with snipers," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 486-499.
    14. Großer, Jens & Reuben, Ernesto, 2013. "Redistribution and market efficiency: An experimental study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 39-52.
    15. Cason, Timothy N. & Friedman, Daniel, 1996. "Price formation in double auction markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 20(8), pages 1307-1337, August.
    16. Marta Posada & Adolfo López-Paredes, 2007. "How to Choose the Bidding Strategy in Continuous Double Auctions: Imitation Versus Take-The-Best Heuristics," Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, Journal of Artificial Societies and Social Simulation, vol. 11(1), pages 1-6.
    17. Armand Mihai Cismaru, 2024. "DeepTraderX: Challenging Conventional Trading Strategies with Deep Learning in Multi-Threaded Market Simulations," Papers 2403.18831, arXiv.org.
    18. Dave Cliff, 2018. "BSE: A Minimal Simulation of a Limit-Order-Book Stock Exchange," Papers 1809.06027, arXiv.org.
    19. Bradley Miles & Dave Cliff, 2019. "A Cloud-Native Globally Distributed Financial Exchange Simulator for Studying Real-World Trading-Latency Issues at Planetary Scale," Papers 1909.12926, arXiv.org.
    20. Junhuan Zhang & Peter McBurney & Katarzyna Musial, 2018. "Convergence of trading strategies in continuous double auction markets with boundedly-rational networked traders," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 50(1), pages 301-352, January.

    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:2103.00600. 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.