美国和欧洲期货的执行方法分析

A. Raudys, Skirmantė Matkėnaitė
{"title":"美国和欧洲期货的执行方法分析","authors":"A. Raudys, Skirmantė Matkėnaitė","doi":"10.3905/jot.2016.11.1.038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Order execution methods using various combinations of limit and market orders in U.S. and European futures markets are investigated in this article. Similar to smart order routing in stocks, smart order execution can noticeably reduce futures trading costs. This is important because, in more frequent trading cases, transaction costs can add up to 50% of fund performance. There is much speculation and very little scientific research on whether algos (order execution tactics/methods) can produce the smallest slippage. We try to fill this gap in the literature by doing a simulation study using 0.4 trillion ticksized real world data. We obtained the tick data from a systematic trading firm and simulated various execution tactics aiming to reduce average slippage per contract. We generated trades uniformly and investigated the best tactics to execute them. The research concludes that the best tactic overall is the limit then market tactic, in which we place a limit order on the last seen price, hold fort seconds, and then convert to market order. Transaction costs can be reduced up to 70% for some markets in comparison to the benchmark. In some specific illiquid markets like platinum and palladium, however, this method increases slippage. We note that different markets vary in terms of the best tactics to use, and the methods we have discovered may not hold for large orders, as these orders may start to infl uence the market.","PeriodicalId":254660,"journal":{"name":"The Journal of Trading","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of Execution Methods in U.S. and European Futures\",\"authors\":\"A. Raudys, Skirmantė Matkėnaitė\",\"doi\":\"10.3905/jot.2016.11.1.038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Order execution methods using various combinations of limit and market orders in U.S. and European futures markets are investigated in this article. Similar to smart order routing in stocks, smart order execution can noticeably reduce futures trading costs. This is important because, in more frequent trading cases, transaction costs can add up to 50% of fund performance. There is much speculation and very little scientific research on whether algos (order execution tactics/methods) can produce the smallest slippage. We try to fill this gap in the literature by doing a simulation study using 0.4 trillion ticksized real world data. We obtained the tick data from a systematic trading firm and simulated various execution tactics aiming to reduce average slippage per contract. We generated trades uniformly and investigated the best tactics to execute them. The research concludes that the best tactic overall is the limit then market tactic, in which we place a limit order on the last seen price, hold fort seconds, and then convert to market order. Transaction costs can be reduced up to 70% for some markets in comparison to the benchmark. In some specific illiquid markets like platinum and palladium, however, this method increases slippage. We note that different markets vary in terms of the best tactics to use, and the methods we have discovered may not hold for large orders, as these orders may start to infl uence the market.\",\"PeriodicalId\":254660,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Journal of Trading\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-12-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Journal of Trading\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3905/jot.2016.11.1.038\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Journal of Trading","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3905/jot.2016.11.1.038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

本文研究了美国和欧洲期货市场中使用各种限价和市价订单组合的订单执行方法。与股票中的智能指令路由类似,智能指令执行可以显著降低期货交易成本。这一点很重要,因为在更频繁的交易情况下,交易成本加起来可能高达基金业绩的50%。关于算法(订单执行策略/方法)是否能产生最小的滑动,有很多猜测,但很少有科学研究。我们试图通过使用0.4万亿个微小的真实世界数据进行模拟研究来填补这一文献空白。我们从一家系统交易公司获得了交易数据,并模拟了各种执行策略,旨在减少每份合约的平均滑差。我们统一生成交易,并研究执行交易的最佳策略。研究得出的结论是,最好的策略是先限价后市价策略,我们在最后看到的价格上下限价单,坚持几秒钟,然后转换为市价单。与基准相比,某些市场的交易成本最高可降低70%。然而,在一些特定的非流动性市场,如铂和钯,这种方法会增加滑点。我们注意到,不同的市场在使用最佳策略方面有所不同,我们发现的方法可能不适用于大订单,因为这些订单可能会开始影响市场。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Analysis of Execution Methods in U.S. and European Futures
Order execution methods using various combinations of limit and market orders in U.S. and European futures markets are investigated in this article. Similar to smart order routing in stocks, smart order execution can noticeably reduce futures trading costs. This is important because, in more frequent trading cases, transaction costs can add up to 50% of fund performance. There is much speculation and very little scientific research on whether algos (order execution tactics/methods) can produce the smallest slippage. We try to fill this gap in the literature by doing a simulation study using 0.4 trillion ticksized real world data. We obtained the tick data from a systematic trading firm and simulated various execution tactics aiming to reduce average slippage per contract. We generated trades uniformly and investigated the best tactics to execute them. The research concludes that the best tactic overall is the limit then market tactic, in which we place a limit order on the last seen price, hold fort seconds, and then convert to market order. Transaction costs can be reduced up to 70% for some markets in comparison to the benchmark. In some specific illiquid markets like platinum and palladium, however, this method increases slippage. We note that different markets vary in terms of the best tactics to use, and the methods we have discovered may not hold for large orders, as these orders may start to infl uence the market.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Phantom Liquidity and High-Frequency Quoting COMMENTARY: Commentary on “If Best Execution Is a Process, What Does That Process Look Like?”1 Editor’s Letter Machine Learning for Algorithmic Trading and Trade Schedule Optimization COMMENTARY: A Market Structure That Fits the Needs of Portfolio Managers
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1