Paper detail

Empirical Analysis of Indirect Internal Conversions in Cryptocurrency Exchanges

Algorithmic trading is well studied in traditional financial markets. However, it has received less attention in centralized cryptocurrency exchanges. The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) attributed the $2010$ flash crash, one of the most turbulent periods in the history of financial markets that saw the Dow Jones Industrial Average lose $9\%$ of its value within minutes, to automated order "spoofing" algorithms. In this paper, we build a set of methodologies to characterize and empirically measure different algorithmic trading strategies in Binance, a large centralized cryptocurrency exchange, using a complete data set of historical trades. We find that a sub-strategy of triangular arbitrage is widespread, where bots convert between two coins through an intermediary coin, and obtain a favorable exchange rate compared to the direct one. We measure the profitability of this strategy, characterize its risks, and outline two strategies that algorithmic trading bots use to mitigate their losses. We find that this strategy yields an exchange ratio that is $0.144\%$, or $14.4$ basis points (bps) better than the direct exchange ratio. $2.71\%$ of all trades on Binance are attributable to this strategy.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.