IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2001.00918.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fairness in Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning for Stock Trading

Author

Listed:
  • Wenhang Bao

Abstract

Unfair stock trading strategies have been shown to be one of the most negative perceptions that customers can have concerning trading and may result in long-term losses for a company. Investment banks usually place trading orders for multiple clients with the same target assets but different order sizes and diverse requirements such as time frame and risk aversion level, thereby total earning and individual earning cannot be optimized at the same time. Orders executed earlier would affect the market price level, so late execution usually means additional implementation cost. In this paper, we propose a novel scheme that utilizes multi-agent reinforcement learning systems to derive stock trading strategies for all clients which keep a balance between revenue and fairness. First, we demonstrate that Reinforcement learning (RL) is able to learn from experience and adapt the trading strategies to the complex market environment. Secondly, we show that the Multi-agent RL system allows developing trading strategies for all clients individually, thus optimizing individual revenue. Thirdly, we use the Generalized Gini Index (GGI) aggregation function to control the fairness level of the revenue across all clients. Lastly, we empirically demonstrate the superiority of the novel scheme in improving fairness meanwhile maintaining optimization of revenue.

Suggested Citation

  • Wenhang Bao, 2019. "Fairness in Multi-agent Reinforcement Learning for Stock Trading," Papers 2001.00918, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2001.00918
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2001.00918
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Wlodzimierz Ogryczak & Hanan Luss & Michał Pióro & Dritan Nace & Artur Tomaszewski, 2014. "Fair Optimization and Networks: A Survey," Journal of Applied Mathematics, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-25, September.
    2. Herve Moulin, 2004. "Fair Division and Collective Welfare," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262633116, December.
    3. Weymark, John A., 1981. "Generalized gini inequality indices," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 1(4), pages 409-430, August.
    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. Michael Karpe & Jin Fang & Zhongyao Ma & Chen Wang, 2020. "Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning in a Realistic Limit Order Book Market Simulation," Papers 2006.05574, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2020.

    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. Mark Schneider & Byung‐Cheol Kim, 2020. "The utilitarian–maximin social welfare function and anomalies in social choice," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 87(2), pages 629-646, October.
    2. Lehuédé, Fabien & Péton, Olivier & Tricoire, Fabien, 2020. "A lexicographic minimax approach to the vehicle routing problem with route balancing," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 282(1), pages 129-147.
    3. Alain Chateauneuf & Patrick Moyes, 2005. "Lorenz non-consistent welfare and inequality measurement," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 2(2), pages 61-87, January.
    4. David Rea & Craig Froehle & Suzanne Masterson & Brian Stettler & Gregory Fermann & Arthur Pancioli, 2021. "Unequal but Fair: Incorporating Distributive Justice in Operational Allocation Models," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 30(7), pages 2304-2320, July.
    5. Banerjee, Asis Kumar, 2010. "A multidimensional Gini index," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 60(2), pages 87-93, September.
    6. Casilda Lasso de la Vega & Ana Urrutia & Oscar Volij, 2011. "An Axiomatic Characterization Of The Theil Inequality Order," Working Papers 1103, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, Department of Economics.
    7. Thibault Gajdos & John Weymark, 2005. "Multidimensional generalized Gini indices," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 26(3), pages 471-496, October.
    8. Josué Ortega & Erel Segal-Halevi, 2022. "Obvious manipulations in cake-cutting," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 59(4), pages 969-988, November.
    9. Aaberge, Rolf & Mogstad, Magne & Peragine, Vito, 2011. "Measuring long-term inequality of opportunity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3-4), pages 193-204, April.
    10. Peter J. Lambert & Helen T. Naughton, 2009. "The Equal Absolute Sacrifice Principle Revisited," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(2), pages 328-349, April.
    11. Chakravarty, Satya R. & Sarkar, Palash, 2022. "A synthesis of local and effective tax progressivity measurement," MPRA Paper 115180, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Flaviana Palmisano, 2018. "Evaluating Patterns of Income Growth when Status Matters: A Robust Approach," Review of Income and Wealth, International Association for Research in Income and Wealth, vol. 64(1), pages 147-169, March.
    13. Carmen Puerta & Ana Urrutia, 2012. "Lower and upper tail concern and the rank dependent social evaluation functions," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 32(4), pages 3250-3259.
    14. Alain Chateauneuf & Patrick Moyes, 2002. "Measuring inequality without the Pigou-Dalton condition," Université Paris1 Panthéon-Sorbonne (Post-Print and Working Papers) hal-00156475, HAL.
    15. Bossert, Walter & D’Ambrosio, Conchita, 2014. "Proximity-sensitive individual deprivation measures," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 125-128.
    16. Sridhar Mandyam & Usha Sridhar, 2017. "DON and Shapley Value for Allocation among Cooperating Agents in a Network: Conditions for Equivalence," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 5(2), pages 143-161, December.
    17. Rolf Aaberge & Magne Mogstad, 2011. "Robust inequality comparisons," The Journal of Economic Inequality, Springer;Society for the Study of Economic Inequality, vol. 9(3), pages 353-371, September.
    18. Walter Bossert & Andrew E Clark & Conchita D’Ambrosio & Anthony Lepinteur, 2023. "Economic insecurity and political preferences," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 75(3), pages 802-825.
    19. García-Martínez, Jose A. & Mayor-Serra, Antonio J. & Meca, Ana, 2020. "Efficient Effort Equilibrium in Cooperation with Pairwise Cost Reduction," MPRA Paper 105604, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    20. Alessandra Casella & Sébastien Turban & Gregory Wawro, 2017. "Storable votes and judicial nominations in the US Senate," Journal of Theoretical Politics, , vol. 29(2), pages 243-272, April.

    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:2001.00918. 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.