Exploration Of Stock Price Predictability In HFT With An Application In Spoofing Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today many brokerage firms use computer algorithms to make trade decisions, submit orders, and manage orders after submission. This algorithmic trading is required to maximize execution speed and so minimize the cost, market impact and risk associated with trading large volumes of securities. Traders place orders to buy or sell a given amount of a security for a specific price on an exchange. These buy and sell orders accumulate in the `order book' until they either find a counter-party for execution or are canceled. All participants can also issue market orders to buy or sell at the best available prices; these orders are immediately executed on a `first come first serve' basis.\nUsing high frequency trading (HFT) data on the Toronto Stock Exchange, provided by the TMX Group, we explore a data driven model to detect a form of high frequency price manipulation -- known as spoofing. A spoofer manipulates prices by placing limit orders which they do not intend to be executed in order to mislead other traders about the available volume of shares. The hope is that this will cause prices to move in their favor. We show that a generalized form of volume imbalance is associated with price movements and this can be manipulated by spoofing strategies. The literature argues spoofing strategies are detrimental to the integrity of markets and new models are necessary for regulators to combat them.\nThe size of the data sets we use definitely qualify for the moniker `Big Data'. The limit order book must be constructed each time an order arrives for a particular stock. This process is implemented on a distributed data system using Pyspark since it would be impossible to do so, efficiently, on a local machine. We discuss some issues and complications that arise from working with very large data sets of this type.\nWe define a generalized volume imbalance as the weight in a convex combination of two price change distributions which forms our price change model. Price changes for different stocks happen at different time scales. We remedy this issue by comparing stocks on time intervals over which they all have the same variance in their price change distributions. Statistical and goodness of fit tests using Cramer's V statistic and Kullback–Leibler divergence, respectively, are implemented to validate our model across a large collection of stocks. The model is then used to test the sensitivity of the limit order book to spoofing and derive relationships between the spoofer's constraints and their optimal decisions. These results could then be implemented by regulators as a way to flag periods of the trading day where market conditions make spoofing possible as a means to improve market surveillance.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".