Loading [MathJax]/jax/output/CommonHTML/jax.js
World Scientific
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×

System Upgrade on Tue, May 28th, 2024 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at customercare@wspc.com for any enquiries.

Unravelling the Trading Invariance Hypothesis

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S238262661650009XCited by:8 (Source: Crossref)

    We confirm and substantially extend the recent empirical result of Andersen et al. (Andersen, T. G., O. Bondarenko, A. S. Kyle and A. A. Obizhaeva, 2015, Unpublished), where it is shown that the amount of risk W exchanged in the E-mini S&P futures market (i.e., price times volume times volatility) scales like the 3/2 power of the number of trades N. We show that this 3/2-law holds very precisely across 12 futures contracts and 300 single US stocks, and across a wide range of time scales. However, we find that the “trading invariant” I=WN32 proposed by Kyle and Obizhaeva is in fact quite different for different contracts, in particular, between futures and single stocks. Our analysis suggests I𝒞 as a more natural candidate, where 𝒞 is the average spread cost of a trade, defined as the average of the trade size times the bid–ask spread. We also establish two more complex scaling laws for the volatility σ and the traded volume V as a function of N, that reveal the existence of a characteristic number of trades N0 above which the expected behavior σN and VN hold, but below which strong deviations appear, induced by the size of the tick.