Algorithmic Trading special report
Click here to download the PDF
Praising Parameterization
The extent to which algorithmic trading has permeated the financial services industry depends on who you ask. Take, for example, a traditional, equities-only "pick-and-stick" asset manager, which typically employs lengthy investment horizons, and therefore, may only execute a small number of orders during the course of a normal month. Shredding large block trades into smaller child orders as a way of increasing the likelihood of obtaining a fill and reducing market impact and diversifying risk, is not something long-only shops are interested in. But scratch under the surface of a more "adventurous" buy-side entity-any firm that executes large numbers of trades during the course of a typical trading day-and you'll find a small army of home grown, broker-provided, or third-party-developed algorithms hard at work, responsible for determining when to trade, where to trade, how to trade, and how often to trade. This might sound highly sophisticated, but in truth, the market's forerunners have been doing this sort of thing for at least the past decade.
What has changed in recent years, however, is the extent to which providers-both brokers and specialist third-party vendors-have "parameterized" their offerings, allowing users to tweak their parameters on-the-fly, effectively changing the algorithm's behaviour without affecting its core logic. This means that in the event that traders believe market conditions have changed from what they were when the algorithm was initially deployed-which can undermine the algo's efficacy-they can modify any number of parameters, thereby maintaining its level of specificity and effectiveness. In the past, end-users were most often forced to rely on their algo developers to make the necessary tweaks, a process that was both long-winded and laborious. In the algorithmic trading roundtable on page 4, there is frequent reference by our four panelists to the importance of parameterization, and the extent to which it allows buy-side and sell-side practitioners to differentiate themselves in what has become a crowded and highly competitive space.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@waterstechnology.com or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.waterstechnology.com/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@waterstechnology.com to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@waterstechnology.com
More on Trading Tech
As US options market continued its inexorable climb, ‘plumbing’ issues persisted
Capacity concerns have lingered in the options market, but progress was made in 2024.
Doubts raised over new FX platform disclosures
New disclosure sheet template will require platforms to outline how they charge for data
Expanded oversight for tech or a rollback? 2025 set to be big for regulators
From GenAI oversight to DORA and the CAT to off-channel communication, the last 12 months set the stage for larger regulatory conversations in 2025.
DORA flood pitches banks against vendors
Firms ask vendors for late addendums sometimes unrelated to resiliency, requiring renegotiation
IPC’s C-suite shuffle signals bigger changes for trader voice tech
Waters Wrap: After a series of personnel changes at the legacy provider, WatersTechnology examines what these moves might mean for the future of turrets and trader voice.
WatersTechnology latest edition
Check out our latest edition, plus more than 12 years of our best content.
From no chance to no brainer: Inside outsourced trading’s buy-side charm offensive
Previously regarded with hesitancy and suspicion by the buy side, four asset managers explain their reasons for embracing outsourced trading.
Band-aids vs build-outs: Best practices for exchange software migrations
Heetesh Rawal writes that legacy exchange systems are under pressure to scale to support new asset classes and greater volumes, leaving exchange operators with a stark choice: patch up outdated systems and hope for the best or embark on risky but rewarding replacement projects.