recent developments in high frequency financial ... - Index of
recent developments in high frequency financial ... - Index of
recent developments in high frequency financial ... - Index of
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
134<br />
A. D. Hall, N. Hautsch<br />
In this paper, we study traders’ order aggressiveness <strong>in</strong> an open limit order book<br />
market. Apply<strong>in</strong>g an order categorization scheme, we model the arrival rate <strong>of</strong> most<br />
aggressive market orders, limit orders as well as cancellations on both sides <strong>of</strong> the<br />
market <strong>in</strong> dependence <strong>of</strong> the state <strong>of</strong> the book. The six-dimensional po<strong>in</strong>t process<br />
implied by the random and irregular occurrence <strong>of</strong> the different types <strong>of</strong> orders is<br />
modelled <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> the (multivariate) <strong>in</strong>tensity function, associated with the<br />
contemporaneous <strong>in</strong>stantaneous arrival rate <strong>of</strong> an order <strong>in</strong> each dimension. The<br />
<strong>in</strong>tensity function is a natural concept to overcome the difficulties associated with<br />
the asynchronous arrival <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>dividual orders and allows for a cont<strong>in</strong>uous-time<br />
modell<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> the simultaneous decision <strong>of</strong> when and which order to submit given<br />
the state <strong>of</strong> the market.<br />
In the previous literature on order aggressiveness, the trader’s decision problem<br />
has typically been addressed by apply<strong>in</strong>g the order classification scheme proposed<br />
by Biais et al. (1995). In this classification scheme, orders are categorized<br />
accord<strong>in</strong>g to their implied price impact and their implied execution probability<br />
determ<strong>in</strong>ed by their position <strong>in</strong> the book. The major advantage <strong>of</strong> this approach is<br />
its ease <strong>of</strong> application s<strong>in</strong>ce all <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>formation on order aggressiveness is<br />
encapsulated <strong>in</strong>to a (univariate) variable which permits modell<strong>in</strong>g the degree <strong>of</strong><br />
aggressiveness us<strong>in</strong>g a standard ordered probit model with explanatory variables<br />
that capture the state <strong>of</strong> the order book. 1 However, there are three major drawbacks<br />
<strong>of</strong> this model. First, it is not a dynamic model, so any dynamics with<strong>in</strong> the<br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual processes as well as all <strong>in</strong>terdependencies between the processes are<br />
ignored. Ignor<strong>in</strong>g multivariate dynamics and spill-over effects can <strong>in</strong>duce<br />
misspecifications and biases. Second, Coppejans and Domowitz (2002) show<br />
that with respect to particular order book variables, trades behave quite differently<br />
from limit orders and cancellations. This raises the question as to whether it is<br />
reasonable to treat these events as the ordered realizations <strong>of</strong> the same (s<strong>in</strong>gle)<br />
variable. 2 Third, modell<strong>in</strong>g order aggressiveness based on an ordered response<br />
model ignores the tim<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> orders. Thus, the trader’s decision is modelled<br />
conditional on the fact that there is a submission <strong>of</strong> an order at a particular po<strong>in</strong>t <strong>in</strong><br />
time while the question <strong>of</strong> when to place the order is ignored.<br />
Our study avoids these difficulties and extends the exist<strong>in</strong>g approaches by<br />
Coppejans and Domowitz (2002), Ranaldo (2004), and Pascual and Veredas (2004)<br />
<strong>in</strong> several directions. First, the use <strong>of</strong> a multivariate autoregressive <strong>in</strong>tensity model<br />
explicitly accounts for order book dynamics and <strong>in</strong>terdependencies between the<br />
<strong>in</strong>dividual processes. Second, as we model them as <strong>in</strong>dividual processes, we allow<br />
for the possibility that market orders, limit orders and cancellations behave<br />
differently <strong>in</strong> their dependence on particular order book variables. Instead <strong>of</strong> try<strong>in</strong>g<br />
to capture order aggressiveness <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> a s<strong>in</strong>gle variable, we account for the<br />
multiple dimensions <strong>of</strong> the decision problem. Third, the concept <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>tensity<br />
function implies a natural cont<strong>in</strong>uous-time measurement <strong>of</strong> a trader’s degree <strong>of</strong><br />
aggressiveness. As the multivariate <strong>in</strong>tensity function provides the <strong>in</strong>stantaneous<br />
order arrival probability per time at each <strong>in</strong>stant and <strong>in</strong> each dimension, it naturally<br />
1 See e.g. Al-Suhaibani and Kryzanowski (2000), Griffiths et al. (2000), Hollifield et al. (2002),<br />
Ranaldo (2004) or Pascual and Veredas (2004).<br />
2 For this reason, Pascual and Veredas (2004) consider the decision process as a sequential process<br />
with two steps. In the first step, the trader chooses between a market order, limit order and a<br />
cancellation, while <strong>in</strong> the second step, he decides the exact order placement.