Author
Listed:
- Álvaro Cartea
- Patrick Chang
- Mateusz Mroczka
- Roel Oomen
Abstract
Providing liquidity in over-the-counter markets is a challenging under-taking, in large part because a market maker does not observe where their competitors quote, nor do they typically know how many rivals they compete with or what the trader's overall liquidity demand is. Optimal pricing strategies can be derived in theory assuming full knowledge of the competitive environment, but these results do not translate into practice where information is incomplete and asymmetric. This paper studies whether artificial intelligence, in the form of multi-armed bandit reinforcement learning algorithms, can be used by liquidity providers to dynamically set spreads using only information that is commonly available to them. We also investigate whether collusive effects can arise when competing liquidity providers all employ such algorithms. Our findings are as follows. In a single-agent setup where only one liquidity provider is optimising pricing in an otherwise static environment, all the algorithms considered are able to locate the theoretically optimal pricing policy, albeit they do so quite inefficiently when compared to a model-based approach. In a multi-agent setting where competing liquidity providers simultaneously and independently use algorithms to optimise pricing, we demonstrate that for one class of algorithms (pseudo) collusion cannot arise, while for another it can arise in certain circumstances and we provide examples where it does. The scenarios where collusive effects appear, however, are fragile, sensitive to the specific configuration and exceedingly unlikely to occur in practice. Moreover, with a modest number of competitors, collusive effects that might otherwise arise in some of the most contrived scenarios are largely or entirely eliminated.
Suggested Citation
Álvaro Cartea & Patrick Chang & Mateusz Mroczka & Roel Oomen, 2022.
"AI-driven liquidity provision in OTC financial markets,"
Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(12), pages 2171-2204, December.
Handle:
RePEc:taf:quantf:v:22:y:2022:i:12:p:2171-2204
DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2022.2130087
Download full text from publisher
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.
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:taf:quantf:v:22:y:2022:i:12:p:2171-2204. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RQUF20 .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.