Improved Pricing on the Stock Market with Trading Agents

More documents

Recommendations

Info

covered the period between 26 th February 1999 and 24 th February 2000 (an overallrise of the exchange), and the remaining 28 samples the period between 25 th February2000 and 23 rd February 2001 (an overall fall of the exchange). A few of the samplesof the period starting 26 th February 1999 had overall falling rates, and similarly, a fewsamples of the period starting 25 th February 2000 had rising rates. Charts 4 and 5(next page) show the average outcome of the respective 28 samples. As mentionedearlier, each sample contains 8 stocks and covers about 3 months (63 days of trading).As can be seen, the pattern seems to persist. Chart 4 depicts a landscape of an overallrise of the exchange and Chart 5 an overall fall of the exchange. To get a more preciseunderstanding of this pattern I have also tested for the standard deviation and othermeasures of accuracy of 8 pairs of parameters for both sets of samples. The resultingvalues can be seen in Table 1 and Table 2.Table 1. Margins of error for the mean values of the final sums divided bycorresponding final sum of the ‘Buy and Hold’ strategy. 26 Feb 99 – 24 Feb 00.Average of 28 samples. Transaction fee set at 0.05 per cent. Results in bold type.ValleyPlateauSub-agent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Sale - 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03purchase 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.03Mean value 0.99 0.95 1.00 0.94 1.02 1.05 1.01 1.06Standard 0.07 0.03 0.06 0.03 0.05 0.08 0.05 0.08deviationof meanCorrectedstandarddeviation0.33 0.12 0.30 0.11 0.24 0.38 0.24 0.39Table 2. Margins of error for the mean values of the final sums divided bycorresponding final sum of the ‘Buy and Hold’ strategy. 25 Feb 00 – 23 Feb 01.Average of 28 samples. Transaction fee set at 0.05 per cent. Results in bold type.PlateauValleySubagent 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Sale - 0.01 - 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.03purchase 0.04 0.06 0.04 0.06 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.03Mean value 1.06 1.07 1.06 1.08 1.02 1.00 0.99 0.98Standard 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.05deviationof meanCorrectedstandarddeviation0.28 0.29 0.28 0.29 0.36 0.27 0.33 0.2611
Chart 4, Average of 28 samples, 26 Feb 99 - 24 Feb 00. Intervals in between threshold values 0.01.1.05-1.11-1.050.95-10.9-0.950.85-0.91.11.05-0.05-0.02S710.950.90.85 S10Average of (Result / (Resultof 'Buy and Hold')).0.01S4Threshold of sale0.04S1Threshold ofpurchase, S1=-0.01, S10= 0.08 .Chart 5, Average of 28 samples, 25 Feb 00 - 23 Feb 01. Intervals in between threshold values 0.01.1.110.91.050.95Average of (Result / (Resultof 'Buy and Hold')).1.05-1.11-1.050.95-10.9-0.950.85-0.90.8-0.85-0.05-0.03-0.01S70.85S90.80.01S5Threshold of sale0.03S1S3Threshold of purchase,S1= - 0.01 , S10=0.08 .12
Page 1 and 2: Improved P
Page 3 and 4: mathematical sign that all is not a
Page 5 and 6: If the model corresponds well with
Page 7 and 8: this purpose I designed a subagent
Page 9 and 10: exceeded a threshold value, set bef
Page 11: Chart 2, 26 Feb 99 - 25 Feb 00, sam
Page 15 and 16: Table 4. The choice of subagent.The
Page 17 and 18: separately (compare with results of
Page 19 and 20: interesting to see how much time th
Page 21 and 22: As I have already indicated in a pr
Page 23 and 24: [Blume and Easley, 1990] L. Blume,
Page 25 and 26: B, SHB-ATEL2-B,VOLV-B,WM-B, STE-R,A

Improved Pricing on the Stock Market with Trading Agents

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?