Guiding Seminar 2 Flashcards
Moore’s Law versus Murphy’s Law: Algorithmic
Trading and Its Discontents
What is Moore’s and Murphy’s law?
▪ Moore’s law in financial markets: from 1929 to 2009 the total market capitalization of the US stock market has been doubling every decade
▪ Murphy’s law: “whatever can go wrong will go wrong” (faster and with worse consequences when computers are involved)
Moore’s Law versus Murphy’s Law: Algorithmic
Trading and Its Discontents
What is algorithmic trading? What are the benefits of AT?
Algorithmic trading (AT): the use of mathematical models, computers, and
telecommunications networks to automate the buying and selling of financial
securities (benefits: cost savings, operational efficiency, and scalability)
▪ Cheaper, enhances operational efficiency and promotes economies of scale, but
creates tighter interconnections in the financial system
▪ Regulation is outdated and its philosophy is ripe for an overhaul
▪ AT is not bad per se, but it needs to be appropriately monitored to benefit the
society at large
Moore’s Law versus Murphy’s Law: Algorithmic
Trading and Its Discontents
What encouraged the rise of AT?
▪ The financial industry is becoming more complex over time (not less) – marginal product of more sophisticated financial technology is increasing
▪ A number of breakthroughs in quantitative modelling of financial markets: Black, Cox, Fama, Lintner, Markowitz, Merton, Miller, Modigliani, Ross, Samuelson,
Scholes, Sharpe, and others
▪ Parallel breakthroughs in computer technology – Moore’s law in technology. Storage and processing speeds have changed the way financial technology
operates
Moore’s Law versus Murphy’s Law: Algorithmic
Trading and Its Discontents
What 5 developments fueled the popularity of AT?
1) Quantitative models in finance:
▪ Markowitz portfolio theory. The CAPM. Factor models for return estimation. The BMS options pricing model. Dynamically complete markets
2) The emergence of index funds:
▪ “passive” investing: value-weighted portfolio need not be adjusted as it automatically does so as Mcap changes; Samsonite’s pension fund: rebalancing
weights to keep the $1 investment in each stock
3) Arbitrage trading (incl. statistical arbitrage)- one human cannot monitor all possible possibilities, AT can.
▪ Even if most arbitrage opportunities are not riskless, if you can manage and quantify their risks, they become an attractive investment opportunity. Statistical
arbitrage: large arbitrage portfolios are formed to maximize expected returns while minimizing volatility
4) Automated order execution and market making:
▪ Slicing and dicing orders to execute them in the optimal (cost-efficient) manner
without moving the price too much (despite a downward-sloping demand curve)
▪ Market-making: continuously quoting prices and standing ready to buy and sell
securities at those prices so as to gain on bid–ask spreads. AT allows for more
sophisticated dynamic risk management (specify how an bid/ask should be
adjusted following bid/ask orders)
5) High-frequency trading (HFT):
▪ Trade at incredibly high frequencies and short time intervals. HFTs’ impact on
liquidity and market quality remains ambiguous: more trading can promote
liquidity, but HFTs are often accused of predatory trading that consummates
liquidity
Moore’s Law versus Murphy’s Law: Algorithmic
Trading and Its Discontents
What are some examples of AT failure?
- Facebook IPO glitch–> too high demand, the AT had to recompute price with every new order–> created a 30 min delay
- The perfect financial storm- in the source of 33 minutes, prices os most actively traded companies crashed and recovered (Apple traded only $100,000 per share).
- BATS IPO- software bug made symbols of stock from A to BFZZ inaccessible –> IPO was canceled
- Knight Capital Group- because of a technology issue sent out erroneous orders into the market–> the company had to liquidate the position–> huge losses
- High-frequency manipulation- spoofing and layering- placing orders to create a false impression of demand/supply and later trade in the opposite direction.
Moore’s Law versus Murphy’s Law: Algorithmic
Trading and Its Discontents
What is spoofing? Layering?
Spoofing- placing an order in a certain direction (buy/sell) to create a false impression of demand/supply for a particular security and to later trade in the
opposite direction of the initial order, profiting from the imbalance
Layering- the same but or a series of orders at different prices (?)
Moore’s Law versus Murphy’s Law: Algorithmic
Trading and Its Discontents
What are the regulation proposals for AT?
–> Do nothing: will result in cost reductions for intermediaries, but will not address
the issue of fair and orderly markets
–> Ban AT altogether: will yield a more “fair” and orderly market, but also reduce
liquidity, efficiency, and capital formation
–> Change the definition and requirements of market makers to include HFT: will
lead to a more fair and orderly market, but will also increase the costs for
intermediaries
–> Fix time intervals between trades (market continuity): leads to reduced
immediacy. Need more analysis to evaluate the effects connected with demand for
immediacy
–> Introduce a “Tobin tax” on all transactions: will reduce trading activity, liquidity
and make hedging more costly (think option dynamic replication) and remove HFT
Moore’s Law versus Murphy’s Law: Algorithmic
Trading and Its Discontents
What are financial regulations 2.0 for the AT?
- -> Systems-engineered: should approach financial markets as complex systems composed of multiple software applications, hardware devices and human personnel
- -> Safeguards-heavy: both human and machine safeguards are necessary to ensure the safe functioning of the system
- -> Transparency-rich: should aim to make the design of financial products more transparent and accessible to regular automated audits
- -> Platform-neutral: should be designed to encourage innovation in technology and finance and should be neutral with respect to the specifics of how core computing technologies work
Deciphering the Liquidity and Credit Crunch 2007-
2008
What were the factors leading up to the housing bubble?
i) A low interest rate environment:
▪ The Fed reluctant to raise interest rates fearful of deflation after the dot-com bubble
▪ Large capital inflows from abroad, especially Asia (bought American assets to
maintain favorable exchange rate and hedge against currency depreciation)
ii) A new “originate and distribute” banking model:
▪ Banks pooled, tranched, and resold loans via securitization instead of holding on to
them
▪ CDOs became extremely popular. Offloading balance-sheet risk (pipeline risk) led to
moral hazard – little incentive in monitoring the loan and performing initial due
diligence, because it will be sold later to someone else → NINJA loans
▪ Banks could lower their capital charges by securitizing (because of inadequate
calculations of risk-weighted assets and flawed ratings systems) and providing
contractual credit lines and liquidity backstops to the investment vehicles they
owned that held CDOs
iii) Lax regulation led to a dramatic fell in lending standards
iv) Banks relied on short-term financing and repo financing –> refinancing risk (if liquidity in the market dries up, it will be difficult to roll over short-term loans)
Deciphering the Liquidity and Credit Crunch 2007-
2008
What were the reasons for optimistic CDO ratings?
1) Rating models were based on historically low mortgage default and delinquency rates
2) Past downturns in housing prices were primarily regional phenomena (diversification due to low cross-regional correlation)
3) Rating agencies collected higher fees for structured products (+ an issuer could resort to another rating agency if not satisfied with a product’s rating)
4) “Rating at the edge”: bank made sure that tranches were slides in such a way that they just barely crossed the dividing line to reach a certain rating (AAA, AA,…)
Deciphering the Liquidity and Credit Crunch 2007-
2008
What is the funding liquidity risk? Market liquidity risk?
–> Funding liquidity risk: funding liquidity reflects the ease with which an institution
can obtain funding from financiers. Funding liquidity risk takes 3 forms
▪ Margin/haircut funding risk (margins/haircuts could change);
▪ Rollover risk (costly or impossible to roll over short-term borrowing);
▪ Redemption risk (depositors may choose to withdraw their money)
–> Market liquidity risk: market liquidity refers to the ease of quickly selling an asset without significantly depressing its price. Measured by:
▪ The bid-ask spread
▪ Market depth (selling without moving the price)
▪ Market resiliency (time it takes for prices to bounce back)
Deciphering the Liquidity and Credit Crunch 2007-
2008
Borrower’s balance sheet effect: to what two spirals does a trader that uses leverage (margin trader) gets exposed to?
▪ A loss spiral: as the borrower’s equity evaporates, he needs to sell some of his assets to maintain constant leverage. Rapid sale of illiquid assets may lead to significant losses (the trader moves the price significantly when selling) ▪ A margin spiral: the level of leverage that the borrower has to maintain doesn’t stay constant during market shocks, margin requirements typically rise and the borrower needs to sell even more assets (reinforcing loss spiral)
Deciphering the Liquidity and Credit Crunch 2007-
2008
What were the effect catalysts (what increased the effect of/ caused the financial crisis) ?
–> The lending channel dry up:
▪ Moral hazard in monitoring: intermediaries have less “skin in the game” and will
thus invest less effort in proper monitoring
▪ Precautionary hoarding: the likelihood of interim shocks and tighter funding
increases
–> Runs on financial institutions:
▪ First-mover advantages make many financial institutions, not just banks,
vulnerable to runs (e.g. hedge fund client runs)
–> Network effects:
▪ Counterparty credit risk (financial institutions are lenders and borrowers at the
same time)
▪ Gridlock risk (holding additional funds due to counterparty risk). Makes risks
materialize
Towards a Political Theory of the Firm
What is Medici vicious cycle?
The ability to influence the political power increase with economic power, so does the need to do so (fear of expropriation by politics)
“Medici vicious cycle” risk: money is used to gain political power and political power is them used to make more money
Towards a Political Theory of the Firm
What are the reasons behind why the size of the average publicly listed company has tripled in the market capitalization?
▪ The size and market share of companies has increased reducing competition across conflicting interests in the same sector (more powerful vis-à-vis
consumers)
▪ The complexity of regulation has increased (easier to tilt the playing field)
▪ Demise of the antibusiness ideology that prevailed among Democrats took place
▪ The ideal state of affairs is the “goldilocks” balance between the power of the state and power of firms (otherwise, one entity will exploit the other)
▪ Network externalities (an increase in usage leads to a direct increase in the value for others)
▪ Proliferation of information-intensive goods (high fixed and low variable costs with increasing returns to scale) [winner-take-all industries]
▪ Reduced antitrust enforcement