scholarly journals Analyses of Daily Market Impact Using Execution and Order Book Information

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kenta Yamada ◽  
Takayuki Mizuno

We analyzed the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TSE) for a 29-month period from August 2014 to December 2016, including every transaction and order book snapshot, and confirmed through a simple statistical test that the market impact depends on each stock. Based on a correlation analysis, we found that the market impact slowly changes over time. From an order book analysis, negative correlations were found between the market impact and the averaged limit order volumes in the order book. We also clarified that one of the factors of market impact is the volume of limit orders in the order book.

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-64 ◽  
Author(s):  
Devlina Chatterjee ◽  
Chiranjit Mukhopadhyay

In an electronic stock market, an equity trader can submit two kinds of orders: a market order or a limit order. In a market order, the trade occurs at the best available price on the opposite side of the book. In a limit order, on the other hand, the trader specifies a price (lower limit in case of sell orders and higher limit in case of buy orders) beyond which they are not willing to transact. Limit orders supply liquidity to the market and aid in price discovery since they indicate the prices that traders are willing to pay at any point of time. One of the risks that a trader placing a limit order faces is the risk of delayed execution or non-execution. If the execution is delayed, then the trader also faces a “picking-off” risk, in the event of the arrival of new information. With these issues in the background, a trader placing a limit order at a certain price, given various economic variables such as recent price movements as well as characteristics of the company in question, is interested in the probability of execution of the order as a function of subsequent elapsed time. For example, if she places a small sell order at 0.5 percent above the last traded price for a given stock, what is the probability that the order will be executed in the next t minutes? With this motivation, this paper considers execution times of small limit orders in an electronic exchange, specifically the National Stock Exchange (NSE) of India. Order execution times have been studied in several other works, where they are modeled by reconstructing the history of the order book using high-frequency data. Here, for the first time, the much simpler approach of small hypothetical orders placed at certain prices at certain points of time has been used. Given that an order has been placed at a certain price, subsequent price movements determine the lower and upper bounds of the time to execution based on when (and if) the order price is first reached and when it is first crossed. Survival analysis with interval censoring is used to model the execution probability of an order as a function of time. Several Accelerated Failure Time models are built with historical trades and order book data for 50 stocks over 63 trading days. Additionally, choice of distributions, relative importance of covariates, and model reduction are discussed; and results qualitatively consistent with studies that did not use hypothetical orders are obtained. Interestingly, for the data, the differences between the above-mentioned bounds are not very large. Directly using them without interval censoring gives survival curves that bracket the correct curve obtained with interval censoring. The paper concludes that this approach, though data- and computation-wise much less intensive than traditional approaches, nevertheless yields useful insights on execution probabilities of small limit orders in electronic exchanges.


2017 ◽  
Vol 03 (02) ◽  
pp. 1850001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Federico Gonzalez ◽  
Mark Schervish

We propose a limit order book (LOB) model with dynamics that account for both the impact of the most recent order and volume imbalance. To model these effects jointly we introduce a discrete Markov chain model. We then find the policy for optimal order choice and control. The optimal policy derived uses limit orders, cancellations and market orders. It looks to avoid non-execution and adverse selection risk simultaneously. Using ultra high-frequency data from the NASDAQ stock exchange we compare our policy with other submission strategies that use a subset of all available order types and show that ours significantly outperforms.


Author(s):  
Ghazali Syamni

This paper examines the relationship of behavior trading investor using data detailed transaction history-corporate edition demand and order history in Indonesia Stock Exchange during period of March, April and May 2005. Peculiarly, behavior placing of investor order at trading volume. The result of this paper indicates that trading volume order pattern to have pattern U shape. The pattern happened that investors have strong desires to places order at the opening and close of compared to in trading periods. While the largest orders are of market at the opening indicates that investor is more conservatively when opening, where many orders when opening has not happened transaction to match. In placing order both of investor does similar strategy. By definition, informed investors’ orders more large than uninformed investors. If comparison of order examined hence both investors behavior relatively changes over time. But, statistically shows there is not ratio significant. This implies behavior trading of informed investors and uninformed investors stable relative over time. The result from regression analysis indicates that informed investors to correlate at trading volume in all time intervals, but not all uninformed investors correlates in every time interval. This imply investor order inform is more can explain trading volume pattern compared to uninformed investor order in Indonesia Stock Exchange. Finally, result of regression also finds that order status match has greater role determines trading volume pattern intraday especially informed buy match and informed sale match. While amend, open and withdraw unable to have role to determine intraday trading volume pattern.


PLoS ONE ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (8) ◽  
pp. e0255515
Author(s):  
J. Christopher Westland

Liquid markets are driven by information asymmetries and the injection of new information in trades into market prices. Where market matching uses an electronic limit order book (LOB), limit orders traders may make suboptimal price and trade decisions based on new but incomplete information arriving with market orders. This paper measures the information asymmetries in Bitcoin trading limit order books on the Kraken platform, and compares these to prior studies on equities LOB markets. In limit order book markets, traders have the option of waiting to supply liquidity through limit orders, or immediately demanding liquidity through market orders or aggressively priced limit orders. In my multivariate analysis, I control for volatility, trading volume, trading intensity and order imbalance to isolate the effect of trade informativeness on book liquidity. The current research offers the first empirical study of Glosten (1994) to yield a positive, and credibly large transaction cost parameter. Trade and LOB datasets in this study were several orders of magnitude larger than any of the prior studies. Given the poor small sample properties of GMM, it is likely that this substantial increase in size of datasets is essential for validating the model. The research strongly supports Glosten’s seminal theoretical model of limit order book markets, showing that these are valid models of Bitcoin markets. This research empirically tested and confirmed trade informativeness as a prime driver of market liquidity in the Bitcoin market.


Author(s):  
Robert Battalio ◽  
Todd Griffith ◽  
Robert Van Ness

We examine whether options exchanges’ pricing schedules affect broker order routing behavior and limit order execution quality. We find that some brokers seemingly maximize the value of their order flow by selling marketable orders and sending nonmarketable orders to exchanges that offer large liquidity rebates. Other brokers appear to bypass liquidity rebates by routing both marketable and nonmarketable orders to exchanges that purchase order flow. Using a decision by the Philadelphia Stock Exchange (PHLX) to change its trading protocol, we provide empirical evidence that brokers can enhance limit order execution quality by routing nonmarketable limit orders to options exchanges that purchase order flow.


2016 ◽  
Vol 02 (01) ◽  
pp. 1650004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Lakner ◽  
Josh Reed ◽  
Sasha Stoikov

We study the one-sided limit order book corresponding to limit sell orders and model it as a measure-valued process. Limit orders arrive to the book according to a Poisson process and are placed on the book according to a distribution which varies depending on the current best price. Market orders to buy periodically arrive to the book according to a second, independent Poisson process and remove from the book the order corresponding to the current best price. We consider the above described limit order book in a high frequency regime in which the rate of incoming limit and market orders is large and traders place their limit sell orders close to the current best price. Our first set of results provide weak limits for the unscaled price process and the properly scaled measure-valued limit order book process in the high frequency regime. In particular, we characterize the limiting measure-valued limit order book process as the solution to a measure-valued stochastic differential equation. We then provide an analysis of both the transient and long-run behavior of the limiting limit order book process.


2017 ◽  
Vol 03 (02) ◽  
pp. 1850003
Author(s):  
Simon Ellersgaard ◽  
Martin Tegnér

Derivative hedging under transaction costs has attracted considerable attention over the past three decades. Yet comparatively little effort has been made towards integrating this problem in the context of trading through a limit order book. In this paper, we propose a simple model for a wealth-optimizing option seller, who hedges his position using a combination of limit and market orders, while facing certain constraints as to how far he can deviate from a targeted (Bachelierian) delta strategy. By translating the control problem into a three-dimensional Hamilton–Jacobi–Bellman quasi-variational inequality (HJB QVI) and solving numerically, we are able to deduce optimal limit order quotes alongside the regions surrounding the targeted delta surface in which the option seller must place limit orders vis-à-vis the more aggressive market orders. Our scheme is shown to be monotone, stable, and consistent and thence, modulo a comparison principle, convergent in the viscosity sense.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 (095) ◽  
pp. 1-36
Author(s):  
James Collin Harkrader ◽  
◽  
Michael Puglia ◽  

We explore the following question: does the trading activity of registered dealers on Treasury interdealer broker (IDB) platforms differ from that of principal trading firms (PTF), and if so, how and to what effect on market liquidity? To do so, we use a novel dataset that combines Treasury cash transaction reports from FINRA’s Trade Reporting and Compliance Engine (TRACE) and publicly available limit order book data from BrokerTec. We find that trades conducted in a limit order book setting have high permanent price impact when a PTF is the passive party, playing the role of liquidity provider. Conversely, we find that dealer trades have higher price impact when the dealer is the aggressive party, playing the role of liquidity taker. Trades in which multiple firms (whether dealers or PTFs) participate on one or both sides, however, have relatively low price impact. We interpret these results in light of theoretical models suggesting that traders with only a “small” informational advantage prefer to use (passive) limit orders, while traders with a comparatively large informational advantage prefer to use (aggressive) market orders. We also analyze the events that occurred in Treasury markets in March 2020, during the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document