3 ms·
Hi, Kelly and Steve here, founders of OneChronos. Happy to answer any questions. In short, we're applying combinatorial auctions to financial markets. Combinat
by lpage 9y ago
Hi, Kelly and Steve here, founders of OneChronos. Happy to answer any questions.
In short, we're applying combinatorial auctions to financial markets. Combinatorial auctions are generally speaking computationally intractable. Our art pertains to structuring the problem in a way that's a good fit for finance, while remaining tractable. The classical approach to solving combinatorial auctions for indivisible goods on the "hard" cases (ones without a totally unimodular constraint matrix) generally involves encoding the problem as an integer program, at which point you're faced with solving an NP-complete combinatorial optimization problem. Needless to say, that doesn't lend itself well to financial market speeds or scales. As such, we've taken a different approach based around guided search, similar to AlphaGo.
The Bloomberg article doesn't go into this, but the other half of the model involves inverting the traditional market event loop. As it stands, market participants receive market data and fills from geographically discrepant trading venues, action it via their models, and update their resting orders accordingly. We invert that model by putting points-of-presence equipped with highly precise network timestamping infrastructure at all of the major financial data centers. We use said infrastructure to timestamp snippets of code (our bidding language) that market participants send to us, as well as market data from other exchanges. At discrete, random intervals on the order of every ~100ms we resequence data in accordance with its origin timestamp (buffering by max time-of-flight) and feed it into our client's code for them to act upon and enter orders into our combinatorial auction. The net effect is an environment that's agnostic to geography, immune to latency arbitrage, and free of the traditional exchange race conditions. That's a huge win for everyone currently stuck in the prisoner's dilemma outcome that results from continuously reinvesting in what's now commoditized low latency trading technology.
Combinatorial auctions aren't a new concept, nor are Lamport clocks/distributed systems primitives based on timestamps, nor is the notion of using code as a proxy bidder (ad exchanges). Our art is around making combinatorial auctions practical for finance, both from an API standpoint, and from a computational tractability one. There's a huge impedance mismatch between what market participants want to do from an economic standpoint (trade on a portfolio level/express contingencies/force atomicity across actions) and what they can currently do with traditional limit order book/auction based venues (simulating the aforementioned by cancel/replacing as quickly as possible). Fixing this will be a big win, and broaden market participation.
- en4bz 9y agoCan you give an example of a situation where a set of instruments is worth more (or less) than the sum of its constituent parts.
- lpage 9y agoYes. Two of the more straightforward ones involve market impact and spreads. Short term market impact results from supply and demand imbalance. As such, multi unit blocks are either an asset or a liability, depending on how you're positioned. Block venues are largely predicated on natural crosses, which are somewhat rare, given correlation across the street. Some market makers will quote block size for conditional orders, or against individual clients, but due to the limitations posed by double auction (mainly the inability to ensure atomicity between getting a hedge off and the outright), it's not done on a firm, multi dealer basis. Combinatorial auctions allow for multilateral block market making on a firm venue, which solves a ton of agency problems and improves liquidity. Similarly, spreads on anything except for the most liquid financial products are generally superadditive when viewed from the taker's standpoint, given that you you'll need to either cross spreads or accept legging risk to execute.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- paulsutter 9y agoWhat's with the "AI" positioning? Seems like you just need really fast optimization to collapse the problem space. A robust, shallow, transparent approach seems both safer and easier to sell. I've found that customers are suspicious about "AI" positioning by startups. Plus, any arguably "AI" approach would be a bad fit to the problem (opaque, slow, no discernable advantage), why take the risk of putting the "AI" label on the project?
- sigstoat 9y agoThe problem space of combinatorial auctions is exponential. There is no collapsing it (there are proofs of this, if I recall correctly), and there is no optimization fast enough to make it feasible when n gets to, say, 64. Sound so like they're doing some sort of approximation (using "AI"), which is the best you can hope for.