IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2012.04103.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Fragmentation in trader preferences among multiple markets: Market coexistence versus single market dominance

Author

Listed:
  • Robin Nicole
  • Aleksandra Alori'c
  • Peter Sollich

Abstract

Technological advancement has lead to an increase in number and type of trading venues and diversification of goods traded. These changes have re-emphasized the importance of understanding the effects of market competition: does proliferation of trading venues and increased competition lead to dominance of a single market or coexistence of multiple markets? In this paper, we address these questions in a stylized model of Zero Intelligence traders who make repeated decisions at which of three available markets to trade. We analyse the model numerically and analytically and find that parameters that govern traders' decisions -- memory length and intensity of choice, e.g. how strongly decisions are based on past success -- make the key distinctions between consolidated and fragmented steady states of the population of traders. All three markets coexist with equal shares of traders only when either learning is too weak and traders choose randomly, or when markets are identical. In the latter case, the population of traders is fragmented across the markets. For the more general case of markets with different biases, we note that market dominance is the more typical scenario. These results are interesting because previously either strong differentiation of markets or heterogeneity in the needs of traders was found to be a necessary condition for market coexistence. We show that, in contrast, these states can emerge simply as a consequence of co-adaptation of an initially homogeneous population of traders.

Suggested Citation

  • Robin Nicole & Aleksandra Alori'c & Peter Sollich, 2020. "Fragmentation in trader preferences among multiple markets: Market coexistence versus single market dominance," Papers 2012.04103, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2021.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2012.04103
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/2012.04103
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caillaud, Bernard & Jullien, Bruno, 2003. "Chicken & Egg: Competition among Intermediation Service Providers," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 34(2), pages 309-328, Summer.
    2. B. Tóth & E. Scalas & J. Huber & M. Kirchler, 2007. "The value of information in a multi-agent market model," The European Physical Journal B: Condensed Matter and Complex Systems, Springer;EDP Sciences, vol. 55(1), pages 115-120, January.
    3. Colin Camerer & Teck-Hua Ho, 1999. "Experience-weighted Attraction Learning in Normal Form Games," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 67(4), pages 827-874, July.
    4. Mikhail Anufriev & Jasmina Arifovic & John Ledyard & Valentyn Panchenko, 2013. "Efficiency of continuous double auctions under individual evolutionary learning with full or limited information," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 539-573, July.
    5. O'Hara, Maureen & Ye, Mao, 2011. "Is market fragmentation harming market quality?," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(3), pages 459-474, June.
    6. 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.
    7. Duffy, John, 2006. "Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 949-1011, Elsevier.
    8. Aleksandra Alori'c & Peter Sollich, 2019. "Market fragmentation and market consolidation: Multiple steady states in systems of adaptive traders choosing where to trade," Papers 1902.06549, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2019.
    9. Ho, Teck H. & Camerer, Colin F. & Chong, Juin-Kuan, 2007. "Self-tuning experience weighted attraction learning in games," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 177-198, March.
    10. Robin Nicole & Peter Sollich, 2018. "Dynamical selection of Nash equilibria using reinforcement learning: Emergence of heterogeneous mixed equilibria," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(7), pages 1-37, July.
    11. An, Ing & Chen, Shi & Guo, Han-ying, 1984. "Search for the symmetry of the Fokker-Planck equation," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 128(3), pages 520-528.
    12. Peter Gomber & Satchit Sagade & Erik Theissen & Moritz Christian Weber & Christian Westheide, 2017. "Competition Between Equity Markets: A Review Of The Consolidation Versus Fragmentation Debate," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(3), pages 792-814, July.
    13. Frédéric Amblard & Francisco J. Miguel & Adrien Blanchet & Benoit Gaudou, 2015. "Advances in Artificial Economics," Post-Print hal-03209315, HAL.
    14. Aleksandra Alorić & Peter Sollich & Peter McBurney, 2015. "Spontaneous Segregation of Agents Across Double Auction Markets," Lecture Notes in Economics and Mathematical Systems, in: Frédéric Amblard & Francisco J. Miguel & Adrien Blanchet & Benoit Gaudou (ed.), Advances in Artificial Economics, edition 127, pages 79-90, Springer.
    15. Hasbrouck, Joel, 1995. "One Security, Many Markets: Determining the Contributions to Price Discovery," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 50(4), pages 1175-1199, September.
    16. Aleksandra Alorić & Peter Sollich & Peter McBurney & Tobias Galla, 2016. "Emergence of Cooperative Long-Term Market Loyalty in Double Auction Markets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-26, April.
    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. Aleksandra Alorić & Peter Sollich & Peter McBurney & Tobias Galla, 2016. "Emergence of Cooperative Long-Term Market Loyalty in Double Auction Markets," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-26, April.
    2. Mikhail Anufriev & Jasmina Arifovic & John Ledyard & Valentyn Panchenko, 2013. "Efficiency of continuous double auctions under individual evolutionary learning with full or limited information," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 539-573, July.
    3. repec:wyi:journl:002151 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Shu-Heng Chen & Yi-Lin Hsieh, 2011. "Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Asset Markets," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 37(1), pages 109-133.
    5. 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.
    6. Ligot, Stephanie & Gillet, Roland & Veryzhenko, Iryna, 2021. "Intraday volatility smile: Effects of fragmentation and high frequency trading on price efficiency," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    7. Shachat, Jason & Swarthout, J. Todd, 2012. "Learning about learning in games through experimental control of strategic interdependence," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 383-402.
    8. Chernov, G. & Susin, I., 2019. "Models of learning in games: An overview," Journal of the New Economic Association, New Economic Association, vol. 44(4), pages 77-125.
    9. Michiel Leur & Mikhail Anufriev, 2018. "Timing under individual evolutionary learning in a continuous double auction," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 28(3), pages 609-631, August.
    10. Suchismita Mishra & Le Zhao, 2021. "Order Routing Decisions for a Fragmented Market: A Review," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-32, November.
    11. Robin Nicole & Peter Sollich, 2017. "Dynamical selection of Nash equilibria using Experience Weighted Attraction Learning: emergence of heterogeneous mixed equilibria," Papers 1706.09763, arXiv.org.
    12. Aleksandra Aloric & Peter Sollich & Peter McBurney & Tobias Galla, 2015. "Emergence of Cooperative Long-term Market Loyalty in Double Auction Markets," Papers 1510.07927, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2017.
    13. Erhao Xie, 2019. "Monetary Payoff and Utility Function in Adaptive Learning Models," Staff Working Papers 19-50, Bank of Canada.
    14. Xu, Liao & Xu, Lu & Zhao, Jing & Zhao, Yang, 2020. "Information-based trading and information propagation: Evidence from the exchange traded fund market," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    15. James S. Ang & Kenneth J. Hunsader & Shaojun Zhang, 2019. "Order dynamics during the flash crash," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 20(5), pages 365-383, September.
    16. Marco LiCalzi & Roland Mühlenbernd, 2022. "Feature-weighted categorized play across symmetric games," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 25(3), pages 1052-1078, June.
    17. Bigoni, Maria & Fort, Margherita, 2013. "Information and learning in oligopoly: An experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 81(C), pages 192-214.
    18. J. Reiß & Irenaeus Wolff, 2014. "Incentive effects of funding contracts: an experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 17(4), pages 586-614, December.
    19. Xu, Liao & Pu, Wenyan, 2022. "ETFs, arbitrage activity, and stock market efficiency: Evidence from Chinese CSI 300 ETFs," Economic Analysis and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 1-9.
    20. Vinay Patel, 2015. "Price Discovery in US and Australian Stock and Options Markets," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 27, July-Dece.
    21. Andreas Nicklisch, 2011. "Learning strategic environments: an experimental study of strategy formation and transfer," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 71(4), pages 539-558, October.

    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:2012.04103. 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.