Link to paper

The full paper is available here.

You can also find the paper on PapersWithCode here.

Abstract

  • A quadratic rough Heston model is used to model the joint behavior of SPX and VIX
  • A market maker is trying to maximize their profit from spread capturing while controlling the portfolio’s inventory risk
  • The optimization problem is high dimensional and is relaxed by several approximations
  • An asymptotic closed-form solution is obtained
  • Numerical experiments are used to illustrate the accuracy and relevance of the approximations

Paper Content

Introduction

  • Constant volatility assumption in Black-Scholes model is not consistent with empirical observations
  • Stochastic volatility models can reproduce stylized facts of historical data
  • Implied volatility surfaces generated by conventional models differ from empirical observations
  • Rough volatility paradigm brings new solutions that achieve superior fits of implied volatility surfaces
  • Quadratic rough Heston (QRH) model models price of asset and its spot variance
  • QRH model encodes Zumbach effect
  • Price returns largely explain volatility
  • QRH model gives opportunities to model SPX derivatives
  • Market making problem is formulated as dynamic programming problem
  • Mean-variance type objective function is considered
  • Multi-asset market making problem is exposed to curse of dimensionality
  • Factor decomposition and deep neural networks are used to reduce dimension of problem
  • Closed-form approximations are obtained by replacing Hamiltonian functions with quadratic ones
  • Market maker decides whether to submit limit orders at best limits or get immediate execution using market orders
  • Market maker tries to maximize expected gain from spread capturing while controlling inventory risk

Multi-factor approximation of the qrh model

  • Multi-factor approximation of the QRH model introduced in [28]
  • Model is Markovian
  • Prices of derivatives can be obtained as a function of the risk-neutral measure
  • Vanilla SPX and VIX options can be computed using neural networks
  • PDE can be solved using deep learning

Multi-asset market making

  • Problem is considered over a period of time T
  • Market maker decides whether to make a market at the limits P j t plus/minus one-half tick size
  • Two point processes modeling the number of transactions at the bid and ask size
  • Dynamics of the inventory process (q j t ) t∈[0,T ] of asset j is given by
  • Dynamics of the cash process (Y t ) t∈[0,T ] of the market maker is given by
  • Objective function of the market maker is to maximize expected terminal wealth while penalizing inventory risk
  • Value function has (2 + n + d) variables

The hamilton-jacobi-bellman equations

  • QRH model has multidimensional nature
  • Approximation reduces dimensionality
  • Time horizon of problem is relatively short
  • Numerical tests on simulated and market data show effectiveness of daily hedging
  • Market maker can reset algorithm with updated parameters
  • Value function satisfies q j s δ j ) 2 ds
  • HJB equation associated with problem is given by system of ODEs
  • Existence and uniqueness of solution of equation with terminal condition is given
  • Optimal market making decisions are given by verification argument
  • When market maker controls only portfolio’s net risk, variable q can be summarized with one variable

Quadratic approximation

  • Equation (3.2) is difficult to solve with classical numerical methods
  • Approximate Hamiltonian functions with quadratic ones to obtain closed-form solution
  • Most of the development follows the same methodologies as in [6]
  • Approximated Hamiltonian functions have Ĥj,k (0) = H j,k (0) and ( Ĥj,k ) (0) = (H j,k ) (0)
  • Approximated solution can be written as a quadratic function of q
  • Focus on asymptotic formulas of A and B
  • Optimal decisions can be simplified
  • Problem can be extended to cover other limits

Daily hedging with spx

  • Discrete hedging is used to evaluate the relevance of the QRH model and the idea of using constant δ t.
  • Cumulative profit of discrete hedging is given by an equation.
  • QRH model is calibrated with market data and δj t k is computed by neural networks.
  • Hedging portfolios can follow the market price’s evolution with daily rebalancing.
  • High-frequency hedging is not mandatory to obtain satisfactory results.

Example 3

  • Market making problem is tested on six assets
  • Risk mutualization is considered
  • Performance and risk of uni-asset and multi-asset strategies are tested with varying risk penalization parameter

Multi-factor approximation of the qrh model

  • Multi-factor approximation of the QRH model introduced in [28]
  • Model is Markovian
  • Prices of derivatives can be obtained as a function of the risk-neutral measure
  • Vanilla SPX and VIX options can be computed using neural networks
  • PDE can be solved using deep learning

Multi-asset market making

  • Problem is considered over a period of time T
  • Market maker decides whether to make a market at the limits P j t plus/minus one-half tick size
  • Two point processes modeling the number of transactions at the bid and ask size
  • Dynamics of the inventory process (q j t ) t∈[0,T ] of asset j is given by
  • Dynamics of the cash process (Y t ) t∈[0,T ] of the market maker is given by
  • Objective function of the market maker is to maximize expected terminal wealth while penalizing inventory risk
  • Value function has (2 + n + d) variables

The hamilton-jacobi-bellman equations

  • QRH model has multidimensional nature, so dimensionality is reduced with an approximation
  • Approximation allows for constant drift µ
  • Numerical tests on simulated and market data show effectiveness of daily hedging
  • Market maker can reset algorithm with updated parameters in case of significant market movement
  • Value function u(•) is transformed to one with (1 + d) variables
  • HJB equation associated with (3.1) is given by a system of ODEs
  • Existence and uniqueness of a solution of (3.2) with terminal condition (3.3) is given
  • Optimal market making decisions in the problem (3.1) are given by a verification argument
  • When market maker controls only portfolio’s net risk, variable q can be summarized with one variable

Quadratic approximation

  • Equation (3.2) is difficult to solve with classical numerical methods
  • Approximate Hamiltonian functions with quadratic ones to obtain closed-form solution
  • Most of the development follows the same methodologies as in [6]
  • Approximated Hamiltonian functions have Ĥj,k (0) = H j,k (0) and ( Ĥj,k ) (0) = (H j,k ) (0)
  • Approximated solution can be written as a quadratic function of q
  • Focus on asymptotic formulas of A and B
  • Optimal decisions can be simplified
  • Problem can be extended to cover other limits

Daily hedging with spx

  • Discrete hedging is used to evaluate the relevance of the QRH model and the idea of using constant δ t.
  • Cumulative profit of discrete hedging is given by an equation.
  • QRH model is calibrated with market data and δj t k is computed by neural networks.
  • Hedging portfolios can follow the market price’s evolution with daily rebalancing.
  • High-frequency hedging is not mandatory to obtain satisfactory results.

Market making approximation

Example 1

  • Assessed proposed quadratic approximation
  • Two-asset example with SPX and VIX future
  • Parameters of QRH model taken
  • Neural network approximating pricing function of VIX future
  • Market making parameters considered
  • Classical Euler scheme to approximate true value function
  • Time does not play crucial role for optimal controls
  • Quadratic approximation checked
  • Backtests conducted on simulated data with different risk aversion preferences

Example 2

  • Four assets under consideration
  • Value function θ defined in Equation (3.5)
  • Quadratic approximation method used
  • Backtests used to perceive effectiveness of approximated solution

Example 3

  • Market making problem is tested on six assets
  • Risk mutualization is considered
  • Performance and risk of uni-asset and multi-asset strategies are tested with varying risk penalization parameter