IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jmathe/v11y2023i7p1673-d1112351.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Invoice Discounting Using Kelly Criterion by Automated Market Makers-like Implementations

Author

Listed:
  • Peplluis R. Esteva

    (Byppay Global SL, 17007 Girona, Spain
    Centre for Blockchain Technologies, University College London, London WC1E 6BT, UK
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

  • Andrés El-Fakdi

    (TECNIO Centre EASY, VICOROB Institute, University of Girona, 17003 Girona, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.
    Serra Húnter Fellow.)

  • Alberto Ballesteros-Rodríguez

    (Computer Science Department, University of Alcalá, 28805 Alcalá de Henares, Spain
    Computing and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CAILab), Camilo José Cela University, 28692 Madrid, Spain
    These authors contributed equally to this work.)

Abstract

Funding shortages are a persistent issue, particularly for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), and the problem tends to worsen cyclically. The market for factoring and invoice discounting aims to address delays in payment for commercial invoices. These involves sellers present unpaid invoices to financial organizations, typically banks, who provide an advance payment. The implementations of the factoring services without intermediaries in blockchain of the state of the art are all based on the publication on-chain of all the invoices, use know your customer (KYC) mechanisms, and over-collateralize the invoices. This article proposes a new, decentralized approach to lending services that completely eliminates intermediaries and does not require strong KYC, yet it is reasonably resilient. The approach uses liquidity pools and associated heuristics to create a model of risk compensation. In this model, a formula measures the contributed collateral to an invoice and the risk of a late invoice or non-payment, using the Kelly criterion to calculate the optimal premium for funding said invoice in the liquidity pool. The algorithm’s performance is tested in many scenarios involving several invoice amounts, collaterals, payment delays, and non-payment rates. The study also examines premium distribution policies and hack scenarios involving bogus, non-payable invoices. The outcome is a decentralized market that uses the Kelly criterion and is reasonably resilient to a wide range of invoicing scenarios, including 5% non-payment rates and 10% bogus invoices, yet provides a sound profit to liquidity providers. The algorithm’s resilience is enhanced by several premium distribution policies over partially collateralized invoices from 50 to 70%, resulting in optimal premium withdrawal policies every 30 days, making it the first protocol for loanable funds that does not require over-collateralization to be profitable and resilient.

Suggested Citation

  • Peplluis R. Esteva & Andrés El-Fakdi & Alberto Ballesteros-Rodríguez, 2023. "Invoice Discounting Using Kelly Criterion by Automated Market Makers-like Implementations," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(7), pages 1-37, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:7:p:1673-:d:1112351
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/7/1673/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2227-7390/11/7/1673/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Guillermo Angeris & Tarun Chitra, 2020. "Improved Price Oracles: Constant Function Market Makers," Papers 2003.10001, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2020.
    2. Jiahua Xu & Nikhil Vadgama, 2021. "From banks to DeFi: the evolution of the lending market," Papers 2104.00970, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2022.
    3. Maxim Bichuch & Zachary Feinstein, 2022. "Axioms for Automated Market Makers: A Mathematical Framework in FinTech and Decentralized Finance," Papers 2210.01227, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2025.
    4. Teng Andrea Xu & Jiahua Xu, 2022. "A Short Survey on Business Models of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) Protocols," Papers 2202.07742, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2023.
    5. Raphael Auer & Bernhard Haslhofer & Stefan Kitzler & Pietro Saggese & Friedhelm Victor, 2024. "The technology of decentralized finance (DeFi)," Digital Finance, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 55-95, March.
    6. Gert Wehinger, 2014. "SMEs and the credit crunch: Current financing difficulties, policy measures and a review of literature," OECD Journal: Financial Market Trends, OECD Publishing, vol. 2013(2), pages 115-148.
    7. Lewis Gudgeon & Sam M. Werner & Daniel Perez & William J. Knottenbelt, 2020. "DeFi Protocols for Loanable Funds: Interest Rates, Liquidity and Market Efficiency," Papers 2006.13922, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2020.
    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. Peplluis R. Esteva & Alberto Ballesteros Rodr'iguez, 2023. "Invoice discounting using kelly criterion by automated market makers-like implementations," Papers 2302.09009, arXiv.org.
    2. Raphael Auer & Bernhard Haslhofer & Stefan Kitzler & Pietro Saggese & Friedhelm Victor, 2024. "The technology of decentralized finance (DeFi)," Digital Finance, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 55-95, March.
    3. Makridis, Christos A. & Fröwis, Michael & Sridhar, Kiran & Böhme, Rainer, 2023. "The rise of decentralized cryptocurrency exchanges: Evaluating the role of airdrops and governance tokens," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    4. Son, Jaemin & Ryu, Doojin, 2024. "Competitive dynamics between decentralized and centralized finance lending markets," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 96(PB).
    5. Massimo Bartoletti & James Hsin-yu Chiang & Alberto Lluch-Lafuente, 2020. "SoK: Lending Pools in Decentralized Finance," Papers 2012.13230, arXiv.org.
    6. Teng Andrea Xu & Jiahua Xu & Kristof Lommers, 2022. "DeFi versus TradFi: Valuation Using Multiples and Discounted Cash Flows," Papers 2210.16846, arXiv.org, revised May 2025.
    7. Sam M. Werner & Daniel Perez & Lewis Gudgeon & Ariah Klages-Mundt & Dominik Harz & William J. Knottenbelt, 2021. "SoK: Decentralized Finance (DeFi)," Papers 2101.08778, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2022.
    8. Jiahua Xu & Yebo Feng, 2022. "Reap the Harvest on Blockchain: A Survey of Yield Farming Protocols," Papers 2210.04194, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2022.
    9. Estelle Sterrett & Waylon Jepsen & Evan Kim, 2022. "Replicating Portfolios: Constructing Permissionless Derivatives," Papers 2205.09890, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2022.
    10. Junliang Luo & Stefan Kitzler & Pietro Saggese, 2024. "Investigating Similarities Across Decentralized Financial (DeFi) Services," Papers 2404.00034, arXiv.org.
    11. Hamed Amini & Maxim Bichuch & Zachary Feinstein, 2023. "Decentralized Prediction Markets and Sports Books," Papers 2307.08768, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    12. Lioba Heimbach & Eric Schertenleib & Roger Wattenhofer, 2023. "DeFi Lending During The Merge," Papers 2303.08748, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2023.
    13. Petr Korab & Jitka Pomenkova, 2017. "Credit Rationing in Greece During and After the Financial Crisis," Czech Journal of Economics and Finance (Finance a uver), Charles University Prague, Faculty of Social Sciences, vol. 67(2), pages 119-139, April.
    14. Georg Menz & Moritz Vo{ss}, 2023. "Aggregation of financial markets," Papers 2309.04116, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2024.
    15. Lioba Heimbach & Eric G. Schertenleib & Roger Wattenhofer, 2023. "Short Squeeze in DeFi Lending Market: Decentralization in Jeopardy?," Papers 2302.04068, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2023.
    16. Fabi, Michele & Prat, Julien, 2025. "The economics of Constant Function Market Makers," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    17. Saengchote, Kanis, 2023. "Decentralized lending and its users: Insights from compound," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 87(C).
    18. Maxim Bichuch & Zachary Feinstein, 2022. "Axioms for Automated Market Makers: A Mathematical Framework in FinTech and Decentralized Finance," Papers 2210.01227, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2025.
    19. Dev Churiwala & Bhaskar Krishnamachari, 2022. "QLAMMP: A Q-Learning Agent for Optimizing Fees on Automated Market Making Protocols," Papers 2211.14977, arXiv.org.
    20. Auer, Raphael & Monnet, Cyril & Shin, Hyun Song, 2025. "Distributed ledgers and the governance of money," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 167(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jmathe:v:11:y:2023:i:7:p:1673-:d:1112351. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.