Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1612.00981

How much market making does a market need?

Vít Peržina·Jan M. Swart
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We consider a simple model for the evolution of a limit order book in which limit orders of unit size arrive according to independent Poisson processes. The frequencies of buy limit orders below a given price level, respectively sell limit orders above a given level are described by fixed demand and supply functions. Buy (resp. sell) limit orders that arrive above (resp. below) the current ask (resp. bid) price are converted into market orders. There is no cancellation of limit orders. This model has independently been reinvented by several authors, including Stigler in 1964 and Luckock in 2003, who was able to calculate the equilibrium distribution of the bid and ask prices. We extend the model by introducing market makers that simultaneously place both a buy and sell limit order at the current bid and ask price. We show how the introduction of market makers reduces the spread, which in the original model is unrealistically large. In particular, we are able to calculate the exact rate at which market makers need to place orders in order to close the spread completely. If this rate is exceeded, we show that the price settles at a random level that in general does not correspond the Walrasian equilibrium price.

Explore related subjects

q-fin.MFmath.PRq-fin.TR

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Vít Peržina, Jan M. Swart. 2016-12-03. How much market making does a market need?. https://arxiv.org/abs/1612.00981

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Variance-Optimal Hedging in the Rough Hawkes--Heston Model

We study variance-optimal stock hedging and the convergence of approximate strategies in the rough Hawkes--Heston model. Starting from the model's affine conditional transform and the affine Volterra jump framework, we obtain semi-explicit hedges for European calls and a representation of the minimum quadratic error through the Galtchouk--Kunita--Watanabe projection. Our main approximation result keeps the original stock, variance driver, and information flow fixed while regularizing the kernel used to evaluate the hedge. To handle singular memory and common marked jumps, we construct the approximate holdings from histories available before trading and preserve the conditional transform's random modulus envelope. Riccati--Volterra stability and weighted truncation then yield convergence in the original stock's trading norm on compact Fourier intervals. For calls, a joint choice of kernel regularization and Fourier cutoff gives convergence of the initial capitals and strategies, uniform-in-time square-mean convergence of continuous-time gains, and convergence of the terminal mean-square error to the variance-optimal value. A numerical experiment with shifted fractional kernels illustrates the construction on common original-market paths.

q-fin.MF↗
arXiv2026

Numeraire Invariance of Entropy-Projected Martingale Measures

Let \(P\) be a fixed physical law and let \(Q\) be an equivalent martingale measure selected from the martingale-measure set associated with a chosen numeraire. A change of numeraire maps \(Q\) to \(T_LQ\), where \(d(T_LQ)=L\,dQ\) and \(L\) is the terminal likelihood ratio. The forward relative-entropy projection minimizing \(D_{\mathrm{KL}}(P\Vert Q)\) commutes with this transform because its objective changes only by the constant \(-E_P\log L\). The minimal entropy martingale measure (MEMM) orientation \(D_{\mathrm{KL}}(Q\Vert P)\) does not have this property, and a trinomial counterexample shows that independently recomputed MEMMs need not be likelihood compatible. We make two economic consequences explicit. First, the two entropy orientations are precisely the \(Q\)-dependent terms in the classical convex-dual objectives for logarithmic and exponential utility, respectively. Second, likelihood compatibility is equivalent to equality of the pricing functionals obtained in the two numeraires. Hence the forward selectors value every integrable claim consistently across numeraires, whereas the two MEMMs in the counterexample assign different prices to a nonreplicable digital claim. We also prove a finite-state class-level characterization: uniform invariance over the elementary one-period likelihood-ratio families forces a smooth convex \(f\)-divergence to be logarithmic, up to scaling and affine equivalence. Finally, in finite-state markets, the forward projection exists under the usual strictly positive feasible-point condition; its density \(dP/dQ^*\) is attainable log-optimal terminal wealth, and the minimum forward entropy equals maximal expected log growth.

q-fin.MF↗
arXiv2026

The Delta of a Variance Swap

We define the variance swap delta as the sensitivity of the price of variance to a change in underlying price. We use Carr-Madan spanning formulas to analyze this sensitivity when the implied volatility smile curve may depend on the underlying price. We show that the variance swap total delta is zero for the class of smile curves that are pure functions of (log) moneyness, which goes against the empirical observation that variance is up when the market is down. We propose a simple modification of the smile to correct this issue.

q-fin.MF↗