An Equilibrium Model for the Cross Section of Liquidity Premia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We study a risk-sharing economy where an arbitrary number of heterogeneous agents trades an arbitrary number of risky assets subject to quadratic transaction costs. For linear state dynamics, the forward–backward stochastic differential equations characterizing equilibrium asset prices and trading strategies in this context reduce to a coupled system of matrix-valued Riccati equations. We prove the existence of a unique global solution and provide explicit asymptotic expansions that allow us to approximate the corresponding equilibrium for small transaction costs. These tractable approximation formulas make it feasible to calibrate the model to time series of prices and trading volume, and to study the cross section of liquidity premia earned by assets with higher and lower trading costs. This is illustrated by an empirical case study. Funding: J. Muhle-Karbe is partially supported by the CFM-Imperial Institute of Quantitative Finance. C. Yang is supported by the Hong Kong Research Grants Council [Grant 24207621] and a University Startup Grant from the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 it