arXiv · arXiv · 2021
This paper studies an optimal consumption problem for a loss-averse agent with reference to past consumption maximum. To account for loss aversion on relative consumption, an S-shaped utility is adopted that measures the difference between the non-negative consumption rate and a fraction of the historical spending peak. We consider the concave envelope of the utility with respect to consumption, allowing us to focus …
Xun Li, Xiang Yu, Qinyi Zhang
arXiv · arXiv · 2021
We consider the hedging problem where a futures position can be automatically liquidated by the exchange without notice. We derive a semi-closed form for an optimal hedging strategy with dual objectives - to minimise both the variance of the hedged portfolio and the probability of liquidations due to insufficient collateral. The optimal solution depends on the statistical characteristics of the spot and futures extre…
Carol Alexander, Jun Deng, Bin Zou
arXiv · arXiv · 2024
We present a theory of expected utility with state-dependent linear utility functions for monetary returns, that incorporates the possibility of loss-aversion. Our results relate to first order stochastic dominance, mean-preserving spread, increasing-concave linear utility profiles and risk aversion. As an application of the expected utility theory developed here, we analyze the contract that a monopolist would offer…
Somdeb Lahiri
arXiv · arXiv · 2021
We propose a general family of piecewise hyperbolic absolute risk aversion (PHARA) utilities, including many classic and non-standard utilities as examples. A typical application is the composition of a HARA preference and a piecewise linear payoff in asset allocation. We derive a unified closed-form formula of the optimal portfolio, which is a four-term division. The formula has clear economic meanings, reflecting t…
Zongxia Liang, Yang Liu, Ming Ma, Rahul Pothi Vinoth
arXiv · arXiv · 2026
Recent works have increasingly applied Large Language Models (LLMs) as agents in financial stock market simulations to test if micro-level behaviors aggregate into macro-level phenomena. However, a crucial question arises: Do LLM agents' behaviors align with real market participants? This alignment is key to the validity of simulation results. To explore this, we select a financial stock market scenario to test behav…
Zeping Li, Guancheng Wan, Keyang Chen, Yu Chen, Yiwen Zhao
arXiv · arXiv · 2014
Prospect theory is widely viewed as the best available descriptive model of how people evaluate risk in experimental settings. According to prospect theory, people are risk-averse with respect to gains and risk-seeking with respect to losses, a phenomenon called "loss aversion". Despite of the fact that prospect theory has been well developed in behavioral economics at the theoretical level, there exist very few larg…
Yang-Yu Liu, Jose C. Nacher, Tomoshiro Ochiai, Mauro Martino, Yaniv Altshuler
arXiv · arXiv · 2025
Decentralized exchanges (DEXs) face persistent challenges in liquidity retention and user engagement due to inefficiencies in conventional automated market maker (AMM) designs. This work proposes a dual-mechanism framework to address these limitations: a ``Better Market Maker (BMM)'', which is a liquidity-optimized AMM based on a power-law invariant ($X^nY = K$, $n = 4$), and a dynamic rebate system (DRS) for redistr…
CY Yan, Steve Keol, Xo Co, Nate Leung
arXiv · arXiv · 2023
Constant product markets with concentrated liquidity (CL) are the most popular type of automated market makers. In this paper, we characterise the continuous-time wealth dynamics of strategic LPs who dynamically adjust their range of liquidity provision in CL pools. Their wealth results from fee income, the value of their holdings in the pool, and rebalancing costs. Next, we derive a self-financing and closed-form op…
Álvaro Cartea, Fayçal Drissi, Marcello Monga
arXiv · arXiv · 2022
This article analytically characterizes the impermanent loss of concentrated liquidity provision for automatic market makers in decentralised markets such as Uniswap. We propose two static replication formulas for the impermanent loss by a combination of European calls or puts with strike prices supported on the liquidity provision price interval. It facilitates liquidity providers to hedge permanent loss by trading …
Jun Deng, Hua Zong, Yun Wang
arXiv · arXiv · 2021
Uniswap is a decentralized exchange (DEX) and was first launched on November 2, 2018 on the Ethereum mainnet [1] and is part of an Ecosystem of products in Decentralized Finance (DeFi). It replaces a traditional order book type of trading common on centralized exchanges (CEX) with a deterministic model that swaps currencies (or tokens/assets) along a fixed price function determined by the amount of currencies supplie…
Andreas A. Aigner, Gurvinder Dhaliwal
arXiv · arXiv · 2026
Loss-versus-Rebalancing (LVR) is the dominant adverse-selection cost borne by liquidity providers on automated market makers. Under geometric Brownian motion, arbitrage profit scales with the probability of a profitable block, which vanishes as the block time $Δt \to 0$; this is the standing argument for ever-shorter blocks. Modeling the reference price instead as a jump-diffusion, I show that the constant-product LV…
Nils Bundi
arXiv · arXiv · 2026
Automated Market Makers based on concentrated liquidity, such as Uniswap v3, significantly improve capital efficiency but expose Liquidity Providers (LPs) to adverse selection costs, formalized as Loss-Versus-Rebalancing (LVR). While theoretical literature quantifies these costs, the interplay between realistic blockchain microstructure and endogenous pricing mechanisms remains under-explored. This paper develops a g…
Daniele Maria Di Nosse, Fabrizio Lillo
arXiv · arXiv · 2025
We consider an equity market subject to risk from both unhedgeable shocks and default. The novelty of our work is that to partially offset default risk, investors may dynamically trade in a credit default swap (CDS) market. Assuming investment opportunities are driven by functions of an underlying diffusive factor process, we identify the certainty equivalent for a constant absolute risk aversion investor with a semi…
Zhe Fei, Scott Robertson
arXiv · arXiv · 2016
We present a simulation-and-regression method for solving dynamic portfolio allocation problems in the presence of general transaction costs, liquidity costs and market impacts. This method extends the classical least squares Monte Carlo algorithm to incorporate switching costs, corresponding to transaction costs and transient liquidity costs, as well as multiple endogenous state variables, namely the portfolio value…
Rongju Zhang, Nicolas Langrené, Yu Tian, Zili Zhu, Fima Klebaner
arXiv · arXiv · 2016
We implement a market microstructure model including informed, uninformed and heuristic-driven investors, which latter behave in line with loss-aversion and mental accounting. We show that the probability of informed trading (PIN) varies significantly during 2008. In contrast, the probability of heuristic-driven trading (PH) remains constant both before and after the collapse of Lehman Brothers. Cross-sectional analy…
Mihaly Ormos, Dusan Timotity
arXiv · arXiv · 2026
Reinforcement learning trading systems published in the academic literature overwhelmingly rely on price-aggregate state representations (OHLCV bars) or limit-order-book depth features, leaving microstructure pattern theories from the practitioner literature, namely Auction Market Theory and Market Profile, without a peer-reviewed computational instantiation. We present ViperQ, a reinforcement learning system whose s…
Asser Moustafa, Rares-Mihail Neagu, Jugal Kalita
arXiv · arXiv · 2026
Automated market makers (AMMs) are a cornerstone of decentralised finance (DeFi). Constant product markets with concentrated liquidity, such as UniswapV3, are now a well-established design. In these markets, liquidity providers (LPs) face a sequential decision problem: they must decide when to rebalance their positions and which price ranges to allocate capital to as market conditions evolve. We formulate dynamic liq…
Georgios Chionas, Charalampos Kleitsikas, Stefanos Leonardos, Leandro Sánchez-Betancourt, Carmine Ventre
arXiv · arXiv · 2026
Automated market maker (AMM) fee rules are often evaluated by liquidity-provider (LP) welfare, but that objective mixes fee revenue, adverse-selection loss (loss-versus-rebalancing, LVR), routing response, and liquidity supply. Fixed-fee Uniswap v3 history cannot separate these channels or identify counterfactual trader-facing dynamic-fee rules. Real fee-related variation nonetheless exists: the Uniswap protocol-fee …
Wen-Ting Wang