Pub Date : 2023-11-23DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2273975
Rafiqul Bhuyan, Coşkun Çetin, Burhaneddin İzgi, Bakhtear Talukdar
We develop a multi-period information-theoretic model of initial public offering (IPO) in the presence of an adverse selection problem that addresses both underpricing in an IPO and subsequent unde...
{"title":"A model of dynamic information production for initial public offerings","authors":"Rafiqul Bhuyan, Coşkun Çetin, Burhaneddin İzgi, Bakhtear Talukdar","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2273975","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2273975","url":null,"abstract":"We develop a multi-period information-theoretic model of initial public offering (IPO) in the presence of an adverse selection problem that addresses both underpricing in an IPO and subsequent unde...","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"163 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138531656","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-22DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2280101
Damir Filipovic
Published in Quantitative Finance (Ahead of Print, 2023)
发表于《定量金融》(2023年出版前)
{"title":"Machine Learning and Data Sciences for Financial Markets: A Guide to Contemporary Practices","authors":"Damir Filipovic","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2280101","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2280101","url":null,"abstract":"Published in Quantitative Finance (Ahead of Print, 2023)","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"8 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138543200","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-15DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2271514
M. Felpel, J. Kienitz, T.A. McWalter
If a high degree of accuracy and market consistency is required for option pricing, stochastic local volatility models are often the approach of choice. When calibrating these types of models, one of the major challenges lies in the proper fitting of the leverage function. This often requires an optimization procedure in terms of computationally intensive numerical methods, such as Monte Carlo simulation, or methods not well suited to local volatility formulations, such as Fourier transform pricing. In this article, we provide an alternative approach using an effective stochastic volatility technique, which provides an efficient semi-analytical approximation of the PDE for the density function of the underlying. This approach allows efficient direct calibration of the leverage function for a large class of stochastic local volatility models, which includes stochastic volatility models such as the SABR, ZABR or Heston model as the underlying base model. We provide calibration and computational schemes and illustrate our approach using numerical experiments.
{"title":"Effective stochastic local volatility models","authors":"M. Felpel, J. Kienitz, T.A. McWalter","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2271514","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2271514","url":null,"abstract":"If a high degree of accuracy and market consistency is required for option pricing, stochastic local volatility models are often the approach of choice. When calibrating these types of models, one of the major challenges lies in the proper fitting of the leverage function. This often requires an optimization procedure in terms of computationally intensive numerical methods, such as Monte Carlo simulation, or methods not well suited to local volatility formulations, such as Fourier transform pricing. In this article, we provide an alternative approach using an effective stochastic volatility technique, which provides an efficient semi-analytical approximation of the PDE for the density function of the underlying. This approach allows efficient direct calibration of the leverage function for a large class of stochastic local volatility models, which includes stochastic volatility models such as the SABR, ZABR or Heston model as the underlying base model. We provide calibration and computational schemes and illustrate our approach using numerical experiments.","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"119 1","pages":"1731 - 1750"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2023-11-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"138531646","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-07DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2272677
Thomas R. Bollinger, William R. Melick, Charles P. Thomas
The popular ‘curve-fitting’ method of using option prices to construct an underlying asset's risk neutral probability density function (RND) first recovers the interior of the density and then attaches left and right tails. Typically, the tails are constructed so that values of the RND and risk neutral cumulative distribution function (RNCDF) from the interior and the tails match at the attachment points. We propose and demonstrate the feasibility of also requiring that the left and right tails accurately price the options with strikes at the attachment points. Our methodology produces a RND that provides superior pricing performance than earlier curve-fitting methods for both those options used in the construction of the RND and those that were not. We also demonstrate that Put-Call Parity complicates the classification of in and out of sample options.
{"title":"Principled pasting: attaching tails to risk-neutral probability density functions recovered from option prices","authors":"Thomas R. Bollinger, William R. Melick, Charles P. Thomas","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2272677","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2272677","url":null,"abstract":"The popular ‘curve-fitting’ method of using option prices to construct an underlying asset's risk neutral probability density function (RND) first recovers the interior of the density and then attaches left and right tails. Typically, the tails are constructed so that values of the RND and risk neutral cumulative distribution function (RNCDF) from the interior and the tails match at the attachment points. We propose and demonstrate the feasibility of also requiring that the left and right tails accurately price the options with strikes at the attachment points. Our methodology produces a RND that provides superior pricing performance than earlier curve-fitting methods for both those options used in the construction of the RND and those that were not. We also demonstrate that Put-Call Parity complicates the classification of in and out of sample options.","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"182 1‐2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135476387","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-07DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2269999
Christian Fieberg, Gerrit Liedtke, Daniel Metko, Adam Zaremba
AbstractIs there a momentum effect in cryptocurrency anomalies? To answer this, we analyze data from over 3900 coins spanning the years 2014 to 2022 and replicate 34 anomalies in the cross-section of cryptocurrency returns. We document a discernible pattern in factor premia: past winners consistently outperform losers. The effect persists across subperiods, withstands various methodological approaches, and its magnitude parallels that of its stock market counterpart. However, the autocorrelation in factor returns is not widespread and primarily stems from size and volatility anomalies. Additionally, unlike in stocks, cryptocurrency factor momentum originates from price momentum, which subsequently transfers to the factor level.Keywords: Factor momentumCryptocurrency anomaliesThe cross-section of cryptocurrency returnsReturn predictabilityJEL Classifications: G12G14G11G10 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Note that the mean return of the cross-sectional factor momentum strategy is half of the difference between its long and short legs.2 See Table IA.I on page 3 in the Internet Appendix to Ehsani and Linnainmaa (Citation2022).3 Specifically, at the beginning of each portfolio holding period, we include only those cryptocurrencies with an Amihud (Citation2002) measure below the 50% and 25% percentile (see table 2 for the variable description). Note that the cryptocurrency market is extremely skewed as a few large cryptocurrencies account for the majority of the aggregate market capitalization. By only looking at the 50% and 25% most liquid cryptocurrencies, we still cover, on average, 98.6% and 97.1% of the aggregate market capitalization, respectively. Therefore, this restricted sample is of high relevance for real-world cryptocurrency trading.Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Narodowe Centrum Nauki [2021/41/B/HS4/02443].
加密货币异常是否存在动量效应?为了回答这个问题,我们分析了2014年至2022年期间超过3900种硬币的数据,并在加密货币回报的横截面中复制了34种异常情况。我们记录了一个明显的要素溢价模式:过去的赢家的表现始终优于输家。这种效应在不同时期持续存在,经受住了各种方法的考验,其规模与股票市场的规模相当。然而,因子收益的自相关性并不普遍,主要源于规模和波动异常。此外,与股票不同的是,加密货币因素动量源于价格动量,随后转移到因素水平。关键词:因子动量加密货币异常加密货币收益横截面收益可预测性jel分类:G12G14G11G10披露声明作者未报告潜在利益冲突。注1请注意,横截面因子动量策略的平均收益是其长短腿之差的一半见表IA。2 . Ehsani and Linnainmaa (Citation2022)互联网附录第3页具体来说,在每个投资组合持有量开始时,我们只包括那些Amihud (Citation2002)指标低于50%和25%百分位数的加密货币(见表2的变量描述)。请注意,加密货币市场极度扭曲,因为少数大型加密货币占总市值的大部分。如果只看流动性最高的50%和25%的加密货币,我们仍然平均分别覆盖总市值的98.6%和97.1%。因此,这个受限制的样本与现实世界的加密货币交易高度相关。本研究由Narodowe Centrum Nauki [2021/41/B/HS4/02443]资助。
{"title":"Cryptocurrency factor momentum","authors":"Christian Fieberg, Gerrit Liedtke, Daniel Metko, Adam Zaremba","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2269999","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2269999","url":null,"abstract":"AbstractIs there a momentum effect in cryptocurrency anomalies? To answer this, we analyze data from over 3900 coins spanning the years 2014 to 2022 and replicate 34 anomalies in the cross-section of cryptocurrency returns. We document a discernible pattern in factor premia: past winners consistently outperform losers. The effect persists across subperiods, withstands various methodological approaches, and its magnitude parallels that of its stock market counterpart. However, the autocorrelation in factor returns is not widespread and primarily stems from size and volatility anomalies. Additionally, unlike in stocks, cryptocurrency factor momentum originates from price momentum, which subsequently transfers to the factor level.Keywords: Factor momentumCryptocurrency anomaliesThe cross-section of cryptocurrency returnsReturn predictabilityJEL Classifications: G12G14G11G10 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 Note that the mean return of the cross-sectional factor momentum strategy is half of the difference between its long and short legs.2 See Table IA.I on page 3 in the Internet Appendix to Ehsani and Linnainmaa (Citation2022).3 Specifically, at the beginning of each portfolio holding period, we include only those cryptocurrencies with an Amihud (Citation2002) measure below the 50% and 25% percentile (see table 2 for the variable description). Note that the cryptocurrency market is extremely skewed as a few large cryptocurrencies account for the majority of the aggregate market capitalization. By only looking at the 50% and 25% most liquid cryptocurrencies, we still cover, on average, 98.6% and 97.1% of the aggregate market capitalization, respectively. Therefore, this restricted sample is of high relevance for real-world cryptocurrency trading.Additional informationFundingThis work was supported by Narodowe Centrum Nauki [2021/41/B/HS4/02443].","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"192 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135476533","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-06DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2269997
Ekaterina Seregina
AbstractThe existing approaches to sparse wealth allocations (1) are limited to low-dimensional setup when the number of assets is less than the sample size; (2) lack theoretical analysis of sparse wealth allocations and their impact on portfolio exposure; (3) are suboptimal due to the bias induced by an ℓ1-penalty. We address these shortcomings and develop an approach to construct sparse portfolios in high dimensions. Our contribution is twofold: from the theoretical perspective, we establish the oracle bounds of sparse weight estimators and provide guidance regarding their distribution. From the empirical perspective, we examine the merit of sparse portfolios during different market scenarios. We find that in contrast to non-sparse counterparts, our strategy is robust to recessions and can be used as a hedging vehicle during such times.Keywords: High dimensionalityPortfolio optimizationFactor investingDe-biasingPost-LassoApproximate factor modelJEL Classifications: C13C55C58G11G17 AcknowledgmentsI greatly appreciate thoughtful comments and immense support from Tae-Hwy Lee, Jean Helwege, Jang-Ting Guo, Aman Ullah, Matthew Lyle, Varlam Kutateladze and UC Riverside Finance faculty. I also thank seminar participants at the 14th International CFE Conference (virtual), 2021 Southwestern Finance Association Annual Meeting, and Vilnius University.The author would like to thank the editor and two anonymous referees for their helpful and constructive comments on the paper.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 MSCI ITALY, MSCI SPAIN, MSCI PORTUGAL, MSCI FRANCE, MSCI GERMANY, MSCI AUSTRIA, MSCI DENMARK, MSCI FINLAND, MSCI NETHERLANDS, MSCI SWEDEN, MSCI SWITZERLAND, MSCI TURKEY, MSCI CANADA, MSCI BRAZIL, MSCI MEXICO, MSCI COLOMBIA, MSCI ARGENTINA, MSCI PERU, MSCI CHILE, MSCI CHINA, MSCI INDIA, MSCI INDONESIA, MSCI RUSSIA, MSCI JAPAN, MSCI MALAYSIA, MSCI SINGAPORE, MSCI TAIWAN, MSCI SOUTH AFRICA, MSCI AUSTRALIA, MSCI KOREA, MSCI US.2 Since the optimization problem with a cardinality constraint is not convex, we find a solution using the Lagrangian relaxation procedure of Shaw et al. (Citation2008)3 Our empirical results suggest that the unbiased estimator θˆ=((T−p−2)mˆ′Σˆ−1mˆ−p)/T is oftentimes negative even after using the adjusted estimator defined in Kan and Zhou (Citation2007, p. 2906).4 Note that we cannot directly apply Theorem 2.2 of van de Geer et al. (Citation2014) since y needs to be estimated and we first need to show consistency of the respective estimator.5 The results for larger degrees of freedom do not provide any additional insight, hence we do not report them here. However, they are available upon request.6 The conclusions from using daily data are the same as those for monthly returns, hence we do not report them in the main manuscript text. However, they are available upon request.
摘要现有的稀疏财富分配方法(1)仅限于资产数量小于样本量时的低维设置;(2)缺乏稀疏财富配置及其对投资组合风险敞口影响的理论分析;(3)由于l_1惩罚引起的偏置,是次优的。我们解决了这些缺点,并开发了一种构建高维稀疏投资组合的方法。我们的贡献是双重的:从理论的角度来看,我们建立了稀疏权估计器的预估界,并提供了关于其分布的指导。从实证的角度,我们考察了稀疏投资组合在不同市场情景下的优点。我们发现,与非稀疏策略相比,我们的策略对衰退具有鲁棒性,并且可以在这种时期用作对冲工具。关键词:高维投资组合优化因子投资去偏化后套期近似因子模型jel分类:C13C55C58G11G17感谢来自Tae-Hwy Lee, Jean Helwege, Jang-Ting Guo, Aman Ullah, Matthew Lyle, Varlam Kutateladze和加州大学河滨市金融学院的宝贵意见和大力支持。我还要感谢第14届CFE国际会议(虚拟)、2021年西南金融协会年会和维尔纽斯大学的与会者。作者要感谢编辑和两位匿名审稿人对本文的帮助和建设性意见。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。注1 MSCI意大利,MSCI西班牙,MSCI葡萄牙,MSCI法国,MSCI德国,MSCI奥地利,MSCI丹麦,MSCI芬兰,MSCI荷兰,MSCI瑞典,MSCI瑞士,MSCI土耳其,MSCI加拿大,MSCI巴西,MSCI墨西哥,MSCI哥伦比亚,MSCI阿根廷,MSCI秘鲁,MSCI智利,MSCI中国,MSCI印度,MSCI印度尼西亚,MSCI俄罗斯,MSCI日本,MSCI马来西亚,MSCI新加坡,MSCI台湾,MSCI南非,MSCI澳大利亚,MSCI韩国,由于具有cardinality约束的优化问题不是凸的,我们使用Shaw et al. (Citation2008)的拉格朗日松弛过程找到了一个解决方案。3我们的经验结果表明,即使使用Kan和Zhou (Citation2007, p. 2906)中定义的调整估计量,无偏估计量θ - =((T−p−2)m - ' Σ - 1m - p)/T也经常是负的注意,我们不能直接应用van de Geer et al. (Citation2014)的定理2.2,因为y需要估计,我们首先需要证明各自估计量的一致性更大自由度的结果没有提供任何额外的见解,因此我们不在这里报告它们。但是,我们可以应要求提供使用日数据得出的结论与使用月数据得出的结论相同,因此我们没有在主要稿件中报告。但是,它们可以根据要求提供。
{"title":"A basket half full: sparse portfolios","authors":"Ekaterina Seregina","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2269997","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2269997","url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThe existing approaches to sparse wealth allocations (1) are limited to low-dimensional setup when the number of assets is less than the sample size; (2) lack theoretical analysis of sparse wealth allocations and their impact on portfolio exposure; (3) are suboptimal due to the bias induced by an ℓ1-penalty. We address these shortcomings and develop an approach to construct sparse portfolios in high dimensions. Our contribution is twofold: from the theoretical perspective, we establish the oracle bounds of sparse weight estimators and provide guidance regarding their distribution. From the empirical perspective, we examine the merit of sparse portfolios during different market scenarios. We find that in contrast to non-sparse counterparts, our strategy is robust to recessions and can be used as a hedging vehicle during such times.Keywords: High dimensionalityPortfolio optimizationFactor investingDe-biasingPost-LassoApproximate factor modelJEL Classifications: C13C55C58G11G17 AcknowledgmentsI greatly appreciate thoughtful comments and immense support from Tae-Hwy Lee, Jean Helwege, Jang-Ting Guo, Aman Ullah, Matthew Lyle, Varlam Kutateladze and UC Riverside Finance faculty. I also thank seminar participants at the 14th International CFE Conference (virtual), 2021 Southwestern Finance Association Annual Meeting, and Vilnius University.The author would like to thank the editor and two anonymous referees for their helpful and constructive comments on the paper.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 MSCI ITALY, MSCI SPAIN, MSCI PORTUGAL, MSCI FRANCE, MSCI GERMANY, MSCI AUSTRIA, MSCI DENMARK, MSCI FINLAND, MSCI NETHERLANDS, MSCI SWEDEN, MSCI SWITZERLAND, MSCI TURKEY, MSCI CANADA, MSCI BRAZIL, MSCI MEXICO, MSCI COLOMBIA, MSCI ARGENTINA, MSCI PERU, MSCI CHILE, MSCI CHINA, MSCI INDIA, MSCI INDONESIA, MSCI RUSSIA, MSCI JAPAN, MSCI MALAYSIA, MSCI SINGAPORE, MSCI TAIWAN, MSCI SOUTH AFRICA, MSCI AUSTRALIA, MSCI KOREA, MSCI US.2 Since the optimization problem with a cardinality constraint is not convex, we find a solution using the Lagrangian relaxation procedure of Shaw et al. (Citation2008)3 Our empirical results suggest that the unbiased estimator θˆ=((T−p−2)mˆ′Σˆ−1mˆ−p)/T is oftentimes negative even after using the adjusted estimator defined in Kan and Zhou (Citation2007, p. 2906).4 Note that we cannot directly apply Theorem 2.2 of van de Geer et al. (Citation2014) since y needs to be estimated and we first need to show consistency of the respective estimator.5 The results for larger degrees of freedom do not provide any additional insight, hence we do not report them here. However, they are available upon request.6 The conclusions from using daily data are the same as those for monthly returns, hence we do not report them in the main manuscript text. However, they are available upon request.","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"3 1‐4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135544447","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-06DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2270711
Alan G. Isaac, Vasudeva Ramaswamy
AbstractA core research area of computational behavioral finance investigates emergent price dynamics when heterogeneous traders follow a mix of rule-based strategies and interact indirectly through a limit order book. This paper offers a detailed specification of such a model in order to raise questions about some previous findings. The questions force a comprehensive reconsideration of the price dynamics of a well-known model. This leads to a surprising clarification of the contributions of various trading strategies to market outcomes: a popular characterization of chartism proves largely irrelevant for price dynamics. We also shed new light on the volume-volatility relationship, and provide improved visualizations to expose market behavior.Keywords: ChartismPrice dynamicsReturn volatilityTrade volumeMarket microstructureLimit order bookComputational behavioral financeJEL Classifications: G12G17C63 Open ScholarshipThis article has earned the Center for Open Science badges for Open Data and Open Materials through Open Practices Disclosure. The data and materials are openly accessible at https://figshare.com/s/e02cbb7790ab902eb72e.AcknowledgmentsEqual authorship; the authors are in alphabetical order. We thank Ben Dempe, two anonymous referees, and an Associate Editor for helpful suggestions. We particularly thank Blake LeBaron for useful discussions and kind encouragement.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Supplemental dataSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2270711.Notes1 If all floating point prices were acceptable, the market would not see common prices across orders. However, a market in a security typically has a tick size, which is the minimal price increment. In addition, order prices outside an acceptable (wide) trading range are typically rejected. Chiarella and Iori (Citation2002, p. 348) address this by introducing a pre-specified grid of possible prices, based on the tick size (Δ). (Unfortunately, they do not document the minimum and maximum values of this grid.) We follow this practice, specifying a (wide) range of possible prices, from 1% to 200% of the reference fundamental price.2 In order to produce the plausible price dynamics required of a replication, their reported parameterization must be substantially rescaled during the price-forecast computation, as exposed by Chiarella et al. (Citation2009) and especially Pellizzari and Westerhoff (Citation2009). In addition, Chiarella et al. (Citation2009) constrain the weights to be positive, thereby removing contrarians from the chartist traders. The consequences of such a change are discussed in the supplement to our paper.3 This paper uses the fundamental price to initialize the price history. Results with a random initial price history are similar, so the model appears robust to this choice.4 The original code is unavailable (G. Iori, personal communication, 2020). Fi
计算行为金融学的一个核心研究领域是研究异质交易者遵循基于规则的策略组合并通过限价订单间接交互时的紧急价格动态。本文提供了这样一个模型的详细说明,以便对以前的一些发现提出问题。这些问题迫使人们对一个知名模型的价格动态进行全面的重新考虑。这导致了对各种交易策略对市场结果的贡献的一个令人惊讶的澄清:一个流行的图表特征被证明与价格动态基本无关。我们还揭示了交易量与波动性之间的新关系,并提供了改进的可视化显示市场行为。关键词:图表价格动态收益波动交易量市场微观结构限价单计算行为金融学分类:G12G17C63开放奖学金本文通过开放实践披露获得开放数据和开放材料中心徽章数据和材料可在https://figshare.com/s/e02cbb7790ab902eb72e.AcknowledgmentsEqual上公开获取;作者是按字母顺序排列的。我们感谢两位匿名审稿人Ben Dempe和一位副编辑提供的有益建议。我们特别感谢布莱克·勒巴伦的有益讨论和善意鼓励。披露声明作者未报告潜在的利益冲突。补充数据本文的补充数据可以在http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2270711.Notes1上在线访问。如果所有的浮点价格都是可接受的,那么市场就不会看到订单之间的共同价格。然而,证券市场通常有一个刻度大小,这是最小的价格增量。此外,超出可接受(宽)交易范围的订单价格通常会被拒绝。Chiarella和Iori (Citation2002,第348页)通过引入基于刻度大小的预先指定的可能价格网格(Δ)来解决这个问题。(不幸的是,他们没有记录这个网格的最小值和最大值。)我们遵循这一做法,指定一个(广泛的)可能的价格范围,从参考基本价格的1%到200%正如Chiarella等人(Citation2009),尤其是Pellizzari和Westerhoff (Citation2009)所揭示的那样,为了产生复制所需的合理的价格动态,他们报告的参数化必须在价格预测计算期间大幅重新调整。此外,Chiarella等人(Citation2009)将权重限制为正,从而从图表交易者中剔除了反向交易者。这种变化的后果在我们论文的补编中进行了讨论本文使用基本价格来初始化价格历史。具有随机初始价格历史的结果是相似的,因此该模型对这种选择似乎是健壮的原始代码不可用(G. Iori, personal communication, 2020)。在https://figshare.com/s/e02cbb7790ab902eb72e.5上找到本文的代码。我们对本文的补充提供了此声明的详细文档我们基于Chiarella和Iori (Citation2002, p. 351-352)的选择,其中描述了平均现货波动率在2×10−4附近。这似乎大致是Chiarella和Iori在λ=0.5左右表示的波动值(Citation2002,图3)。然而,还有另外两种可以想象的方法来模拟每个周期T个时间步长的N个周期。一个是CI的时间段波动率的简单平均值,如(公式6(6)σT=1T∑t=1T|pt−pt−1pt−1| t(6))所示。产生1N∑n=1N(1T∑i=1T|p(n−1)∗T+ip(n−1)∗T+i−1−1|)=1NT∑n=1N∑i=1T|p(n−1)∗T+ip(n−1)∗T+i−1−1|另一种是将(Equation6(6) σT=1T∑T=1T |pt−pt−1pt−1|T(6))直接应用于整个价格轨迹。1NT∑t=1NT|ptpt−1−1|=1NT∑n=1N∑i=1T|p(n−1)∗t +ip(n−1)∗t +i−1−1|显然,这些度量之间的唯一区别是缩放,因此它们之间的选择是任意的和无关紧要的这意味着第一、第五和第四个子图对应于Chiarella和Iori的左列(Citation2002,图1)8更准确地说,除了系列结构的人工制品之外,市场价格的对数在这种情况下应该类似于随机游走由于这个原因,改变权重模式来强调图表是失败的,即使在图表上施加了不合理的相对权重。本文的补编对这些问题作了进一步的探讨细心的读者会注意到Chiarella和Iori的最后一个子图中的尺度变化(Citation2002,图1)。进一步的探索请参见本文的补充部分回报是根据苹果公司股票(股票代码:AAPL)在2016年5月4日至2020年4月24日1001个交易日内的收盘价计算得出的。(最后访问日期:2023-10-04)12我们对两个测试使用了10个周期的延迟长度。 然而,我们也使用Escanciano和Lobato (Citation2009)规定的最优滞后选择方法进行了测试。Ljung-Box测试对模拟收益的最佳滞后为1,对苹果股票的最佳滞后为30。麦克劳德-李检验对模拟收益的最佳滞后为6,对苹果股票的最佳滞后为29。所有病例的结果与表2.13中报告的结果在质量上是相同的。箱形图显示了至少10个时期的贸易计数图5描述了价格序列,如果没有新的交易执行,它使用账簿的中点价格。更多的市场参与使得新的买入价或买入价更有可能超过账面顶部,这增加了衡量波动性。
{"title":"Rule-based trading on an order-driven exchange: a reassessment","authors":"Alan G. Isaac, Vasudeva Ramaswamy","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2270711","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2270711","url":null,"abstract":"AbstractA core research area of computational behavioral finance investigates emergent price dynamics when heterogeneous traders follow a mix of rule-based strategies and interact indirectly through a limit order book. This paper offers a detailed specification of such a model in order to raise questions about some previous findings. The questions force a comprehensive reconsideration of the price dynamics of a well-known model. This leads to a surprising clarification of the contributions of various trading strategies to market outcomes: a popular characterization of chartism proves largely irrelevant for price dynamics. We also shed new light on the volume-volatility relationship, and provide improved visualizations to expose market behavior.Keywords: ChartismPrice dynamicsReturn volatilityTrade volumeMarket microstructureLimit order bookComputational behavioral financeJEL Classifications: G12G17C63 Open ScholarshipThis article has earned the Center for Open Science badges for Open Data and Open Materials through Open Practices Disclosure. The data and materials are openly accessible at https://figshare.com/s/e02cbb7790ab902eb72e.AcknowledgmentsEqual authorship; the authors are in alphabetical order. We thank Ben Dempe, two anonymous referees, and an Associate Editor for helpful suggestions. We particularly thank Blake LeBaron for useful discussions and kind encouragement.Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Supplemental dataSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2270711.Notes1 If all floating point prices were acceptable, the market would not see common prices across orders. However, a market in a security typically has a tick size, which is the minimal price increment. In addition, order prices outside an acceptable (wide) trading range are typically rejected. Chiarella and Iori (Citation2002, p. 348) address this by introducing a pre-specified grid of possible prices, based on the tick size (Δ). (Unfortunately, they do not document the minimum and maximum values of this grid.) We follow this practice, specifying a (wide) range of possible prices, from 1% to 200% of the reference fundamental price.2 In order to produce the plausible price dynamics required of a replication, their reported parameterization must be substantially rescaled during the price-forecast computation, as exposed by Chiarella et al. (Citation2009) and especially Pellizzari and Westerhoff (Citation2009). In addition, Chiarella et al. (Citation2009) constrain the weights to be positive, thereby removing contrarians from the chartist traders. The consequences of such a change are discussed in the supplement to our paper.3 This paper uses the fundamental price to initialize the price history. Results with a random initial price history are similar, so the model appears robust to this choice.4 The original code is unavailable (G. Iori, personal communication, 2020). Fi","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135679624","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-06DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2271223
M. Escobar-Anel, M. Kschonnek, R. Zagst
AbstractWe consider a portfolio optimisation problem for a utility-maximising investor who faces convex constraints on his portfolio allocation in Heston's stochastic volatility model. We apply existing duality methods to obtain a closed-form expression for the optimal portfolio allocation. In doing so, we observe that allocation constraints impact the optimal constrained portfolio allocation in a fundamentally different way in Heston's stochastic volatility model than in the Black Scholes model. In particular, the optimal constrained portfolio may be different from the naive ‘capped’ portfolio, which caps off the optimal unconstrained portfolio at the boundaries of the constraints. Despite this difference, we illustrate by way of a numerical analysis that in most realistic scenarios the capped portfolio leads to slim annual wealth equivalent losses compared to the optimal constrained portfolio. During a financial crisis, however, a capped solution might lead to compelling annual wealth equivalent losses.Keywords: Portfolio optimisationAllocation constraintsDynamic programmingHeston's stochastic volatility modelIncomplete marketsJEL Classifications: G11C61 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Supplemental dataSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2271223.Notes1 Note that obtaining and formally verifying the optimality of a candidate portfolio process requires more than just a solution to the associated HJB PDE, as pointed out by Korn and Kraft (Citation2004).2 As any π∈Λ can only take finite values L[0,T]⊗Q-a.s., we do not need to distinguish between (−∞,β] and [−∞,β] or [α,∞) and [α,∞] for any −∞≤α,β≤∞.3 Technically, one can formulate this assumption less restrictively by expressing ‘No Blow-Up’ in terms of the time spent in each of the zones Z−, Z0 and Z+. However, as this would significantly complicate the presentation without adding major additional insights, it is omitted here.4 If ρ=0 all of these transition times will be infinite.5 Using a similar separation with respect to the zones Z−, Z0 and Z+ and equation (B6), it is also possible to determine a closed-form expression for A from lemma 2.1.6 Equation (Equation18(18) b1−bη(κρσ+η2)<κ22σ2,(18) ) corresponds to part (i) of Assumption 2.4. In the setting of Kraft (Citation2005), part (ii) of Assumption 2.4 is also implied by (Equation18(18) b1−bη(κρσ+η2)<κ22σ2,(18) ) and so does not have to be mentioned explicitly.7 Note that this is different from classic mean-variance optimisation, where the variance of the terminal portfolio wealth Vv0,π(T) is constrained.8 Q.ai (Citation2022) reported that the average length of an S&P500 bear market (defined as a period with drawdown in excess of 20%) was 289 days.9 Since we exclusively work with power utility functions in this paper, we may without loss of generality assume that the WEL is independent of wealth.10 If π is deterministic and Jπ i
{"title":"Mind the cap!—constrained portfolio optimisation in Heston's stochastic volatility model","authors":"M. Escobar-Anel, M. Kschonnek, R. Zagst","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2271223","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2271223","url":null,"abstract":"AbstractWe consider a portfolio optimisation problem for a utility-maximising investor who faces convex constraints on his portfolio allocation in Heston's stochastic volatility model. We apply existing duality methods to obtain a closed-form expression for the optimal portfolio allocation. In doing so, we observe that allocation constraints impact the optimal constrained portfolio allocation in a fundamentally different way in Heston's stochastic volatility model than in the Black Scholes model. In particular, the optimal constrained portfolio may be different from the naive ‘capped’ portfolio, which caps off the optimal unconstrained portfolio at the boundaries of the constraints. Despite this difference, we illustrate by way of a numerical analysis that in most realistic scenarios the capped portfolio leads to slim annual wealth equivalent losses compared to the optimal constrained portfolio. During a financial crisis, however, a capped solution might lead to compelling annual wealth equivalent losses.Keywords: Portfolio optimisationAllocation constraintsDynamic programmingHeston's stochastic volatility modelIncomplete marketsJEL Classifications: G11C61 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Supplemental dataSupplemental data for this article can be accessed online at http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2271223.Notes1 Note that obtaining and formally verifying the optimality of a candidate portfolio process requires more than just a solution to the associated HJB PDE, as pointed out by Korn and Kraft (Citation2004).2 As any π∈Λ can only take finite values L[0,T]⊗Q-a.s., we do not need to distinguish between (−∞,β] and [−∞,β] or [α,∞) and [α,∞] for any −∞≤α,β≤∞.3 Technically, one can formulate this assumption less restrictively by expressing ‘No Blow-Up’ in terms of the time spent in each of the zones Z−, Z0 and Z+. However, as this would significantly complicate the presentation without adding major additional insights, it is omitted here.4 If ρ=0 all of these transition times will be infinite.5 Using a similar separation with respect to the zones Z−, Z0 and Z+ and equation (B6), it is also possible to determine a closed-form expression for A from lemma 2.1.6 Equation (Equation18(18) b1−bη(κρσ+η2)<κ22σ2,(18) ) corresponds to part (i) of Assumption 2.4. In the setting of Kraft (Citation2005), part (ii) of Assumption 2.4 is also implied by (Equation18(18) b1−bη(κρσ+η2)<κ22σ2,(18) ) and so does not have to be mentioned explicitly.7 Note that this is different from classic mean-variance optimisation, where the variance of the terminal portfolio wealth Vv0,π(T) is constrained.8 Q.ai (Citation2022) reported that the average length of an S&P500 bear market (defined as a period with drawdown in excess of 20%) was 289 days.9 Since we exclusively work with power utility functions in this paper, we may without loss of generality assume that the WEL is independent of wealth.10 If π is deterministic and Jπ i","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"19 2","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135679626","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-11-03DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2270495
Muhammad Ash-Shiddiqy, None Mujtahid, None Khamim
{"title":"Islamic Banking and Finance, Second Edition <b>Islamic Banking and Finance, Second Edition</b> , by Zubair Hasan, Routledge (2023). Hardcover. ISBN 978-1-032-36064-5. E-book. ISBN 978-1-003-36697-3.","authors":"Muhammad Ash-Shiddiqy, None Mujtahid, None Khamim","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2270495","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2270495","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"38 9","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-11-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135868344","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2023-10-31DOI: 10.1080/14697688.2023.2269987
Yanfeng Wang, Wanbo Lu, Kris Boudt
AbstractThe goal of core-satellite investing is to optimally balance the portfolio allocation between a core and satellite investment. This paper provides an explicit solution when the investor's optimality criterion is the third-order and fourth-order expansion of the expected utility function, respectively. Based on a numeric example, we document the sensitivity of the proposed weights to coskewness and cokurtosis components. Finally, we use ETFs to examine the portfolio performance of the core-satellite strategy with higher order moments. We document that integrating the higher order moment in core-satellite investing can improve the financial performance of a portfolio.Keywords: Higher order momentsExplicit solutionCore-satellite investingSensitivityJEL Classifications: G11C61 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 For more convenient expression, we report the moments for the percentage log return in percentage point, but in the subsequent analysis, the moments of the log return are used.Additional informationFunding This work was partially supported by the Characteristic & Preponderant Discipline of Key Construction Universities in Zhejiang Province (Zhejiang Gongshang University-Statistics) and the Collaborative Innovation Center of Statistical Data Engineering Technology & Application. National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 71771187, 72011530149, 72163029] and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities in China [grant number JBK190602].
{"title":"Dynamic core-satellite investing using higher order moments: an explicit solution","authors":"Yanfeng Wang, Wanbo Lu, Kris Boudt","doi":"10.1080/14697688.2023.2269987","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14697688.2023.2269987","url":null,"abstract":"AbstractThe goal of core-satellite investing is to optimally balance the portfolio allocation between a core and satellite investment. This paper provides an explicit solution when the investor's optimality criterion is the third-order and fourth-order expansion of the expected utility function, respectively. Based on a numeric example, we document the sensitivity of the proposed weights to coskewness and cokurtosis components. Finally, we use ETFs to examine the portfolio performance of the core-satellite strategy with higher order moments. We document that integrating the higher order moment in core-satellite investing can improve the financial performance of a portfolio.Keywords: Higher order momentsExplicit solutionCore-satellite investingSensitivityJEL Classifications: G11C61 Disclosure statementNo potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).Notes1 For more convenient expression, we report the moments for the percentage log return in percentage point, but in the subsequent analysis, the moments of the log return are used.Additional informationFunding This work was partially supported by the Characteristic & Preponderant Discipline of Key Construction Universities in Zhejiang Province (Zhejiang Gongshang University-Statistics) and the Collaborative Innovation Center of Statistical Data Engineering Technology & Application. National Natural Science Foundation of China [grant number 71771187, 72011530149, 72163029] and Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities in China [grant number JBK190602].","PeriodicalId":20747,"journal":{"name":"Quantitative Finance","volume":"39 40","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"135863982","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}