-
TL;DRWhen estimating the lambda to calibrate A and K, you are dviding the depth by half and taking 70 lambda timepoints. Why? ContextFirst off, thanks a ton for both the OSS backtesting tool and for open-sourcing some examples.
QuestionsOther than step 1 and 5, I have a few questions:
Thanks! |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 1 comment
-
Q1 & Q2:
To count the order arrival for a given time using index operator, I convert 0.5 to 0, 1 to 1, 1.5 to 2, and so forth. Considering the order fills based on the queue position is intricate when measuring the order arrival depth. So, it's assumed that order fills occur only when the trade passes through a particular price. For instance, if a buy trade occurs at 12, ask orders below 12 (e.g., 10, 11) are deemed filled. Thus, if your order is at 10, the order arrival count increases by one due to this trade. This is what Q3: Q4: |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Q1 & Q2:
When we measure order arrival depth from the mid price, the closest possible tick to the mid price is 0.5.
For instance, if the tick size is 1:
Ask: 10, Bid: 9, Mid: 9.5.
If a buy trade occurs at 10, the order arrival depth is 0.5.
Ask: 11, Bid: 9, Mid: 10.
If a sell trade occurs at 9, the order arrival depth is 1.
To count the order arrival for a given time using index operator, I convert 0.5 to 0, 1 to 1, 1.5 to 2, and so forth.
Considering the order fills based on the queue position is intricate when measuring the order arrival depth. So, it's assumed that order fills occur only when the trade passes through a particular price.
For instance, if a buy trade occurs at 12, …