IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/2609.35888.html

The Exact Welfare Guarantee of Fixed-Price Bilateral Trade

Author

Listed:
  • Tingyi Lin
  • Yichen Shi
  • Ke Dong
  • Jiazhuo Li
  • Shawn Yu
  • Huanxi Zhang

Abstract

A seller and a buyer with independent private values can trade only at a posted price. We determine the worst case of this mechanism exactly: the best posted price always guarantees a $\beta_*=0.738024\ldots$ fraction of first-best welfare, where $\beta_*$ is given in closed form by the root of an explicit equation, the worst-case buyer is unique up to scaling, and the worst case is never attained. This closes the gap $[0.7292,0.73805]$ left by work from SODA 2016 through two STOC 2023 papers and AAAI 2026. The proof is an explicit certificate of optimality: after one change of variables, the gap between the optimum and the value of any buyer is a sum of nonnegative integrals, as in a linear-programming dual, and equality identifies the worst-case shape. The certificate also gives the complete tradeoff between gains from trade and the seller's initial welfare: when first-best gains from trade are a fraction $\kappa$ of initial seller welfare, the exact worst-case fraction $\rho(\kappa)$ of gains obtained by the best price satisfies $\rho(\kappa)\sim2/\log(1/\kappa)$ as $\kappa\to0$. The worst-case buyer's survival function has two constant segments joined by an explicit nonexponential curve, and the worst case is approached through a vanishing atom escaping to infinity. The same constant is the exact guarantee of dominant-strategy mechanisms with individual rationality and strong budget balance in every realization. For two units with increasing submodular valuations, an explicit finite instance has ratio below $0.7290804$, so two units are strictly harder than one. Fixing the buyer, we characterize the least probability a random common price needs to guarantee a given ratio against every seller; bounding this quantity over all buyers would determine the exact two-unit constant. Within an explicit family the worst ratio is $0.729080\ldots$, conjectured to be the two-unit constant.

Suggested Citation

  • Tingyi Lin & Yichen Shi & Ke Dong & Jiazhuo Li & Shawn Yu & Huanxi Zhang, 2026. "The Exact Welfare Guarantee of Fixed-Price Bilateral Trade," Papers 2609.35888, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2026.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:2609.35888
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2609.35888
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Myerson, Roger B. & Satterthwaite, Mark A., 1983. "Efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 29(2), pages 265-281, April.
    2. Hagerty, Kathleen M. & Rogerson, William P., 1987. "Robust trading mechanisms," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 94-107, June.
    3. Blumrosen, Liad & Dobzinski, Shahar, 2021. "(Almost) efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 369-383.
    4. McAfee, R. Preston, 1992. "A dominant strategy double auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 56(2), pages 434-450, April.
    5. Čopič, Jernej & Ponsatí, Clara, 2016. "Optimal robust bilateral trade: Risk neutrality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 276-287.
    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. Jason Hartline, 2026. "Robustness in Mechanism Design," Papers 2610.01805, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2026.
    2. Bichler, Martin & Kohring, Nils & Oberlechner, Matthias & Pieroth, Fabian R., 2023. "Learning equilibrium in bilateral bargaining games," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 311(2), pages 660-678.
    3. Kiho Yoon, 2021. "Robust double auction mechanisms," Papers 2102.00669, arXiv.org, revised May 2022.
    4. Yoon, Kiho, 2008. "The participatory Vickrey-Clarke-Groves mechanism," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 44(3-4), pages 324-336, February.
    5. Blumrosen, Liad & Dobzinski, Shahar, 2021. "(Almost) efficient mechanisms for bilateral trading," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 369-383.
    6. Alexander Braun & Thomas Kesselheim, 2023. "Truthful Mechanisms for Two-Sided Markets via Prophet Inequalities," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 48(4), pages 1959-1986, November.
    7. Jesse A. Schwartz & Quan Wen, 2018. "Robust trading mechanisms with budget surplus and partial trade," Economic Theory Bulletin, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 6(2), pages 201-208, October.
    8. Drexl, Moritz & Kleiner, Andreas, 2015. "Optimal private good allocation: The case for a balanced budget," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 169-181.
    9. Loertscher, Simon & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2021. "A dominant strategy, double clock auction with estimation-based tatonnement," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 16(3), July.
    10. Loertscher, Simon & Marx, Leslie M., 2020. "Asymptotically optimal prior-free clock auctions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    11. Ilya Hajiaghayi & MohammadTaghi Hajiaghayi & Gary Peng & Suho Shin, 2024. "Gains-from-Trade in Bilateral Trade with a Broker," Papers 2410.17444, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2025.
    12. Santiago R. Balseiro & Vahab Mirrokni & Renato Paes Leme & Song Zuo, 2022. "Dynamic Double Auctions: Toward First Best," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 70(4), pages 2299-2317, July.
    13. Yoon, Kiho, 2001. "The Modified Vickrey Double Auction," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 101(2), pages 572-584, December.
    14. Mustafa Ç. Pınar, 2018. "Robust trading mechanisms over 0/1 polytopes," Journal of Combinatorial Optimization, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 845-860, October.
    15. Crawford, Vincent P., 2021. "Efficient mechanisms for level-k bilateral trading," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 80-101.
    16. Loertscher, Simon & Muir, Ellen V., 2025. "The matching benefits of market thickness," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 42-66.
    17. Soumendu Sarkar, 2022. "Strategyproof and Budget Balanced Mechanisms for Assembly," Working papers 320, Centre for Development Economics, Delhi School of Economics.
    18. Kneeland, Terri, 2022. "Mechanism design with level-k types: Theory and an application to bilateral trade," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    19. Gottardi, Piero & Mezzetti, Claudio, 2024. "Shuttle diplomacy," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 216(C).
    20. Scott Fay & Robert Zeithammer, 2017. "Bidding for Bidders? How the Format for Soliciting Supplier Participation in NYOP Auctions Impacts Channel Profit," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(12), pages 4324-4344, December.

    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:2609.35888. 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: https://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.