Pages:
Author

Topic: [GLBSE] POLY - Persistent BTC/USD margin trading emulation - page 2. (Read 6232 times)

donator
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
For the less mathematically imaginative, I made a little google spreadsheet "simulation"

You can enter the current exchange rate, amount of BTC to invest and which N to invest in (the yellow fields) and see what happens for price moves.



https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0Au-mVSBh0PA4dExJcHM3aUhpT2ItZ3BFazZ1UlVnRlE

(you need to make a copy of the spreadsheet to be able to edit using "File -> Make a Copy...")

Can someone sanity-check it?
donator
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
Will you provide the market maker bot as well?
That's the plan. If someone else does a maker bot, I'll still need to operate a balance bot which will execute trades placed by the maker bot.

I think I could provide that using my python code (https://github.com/molecular/traidor)

what exactly would it have to do?

  • receive trade requests (amount, desired price, sell/buy)
  • place order with mtgox
  • observe order getting filled
  • give back info about executed trade request

?

and maybe also:

  • provide info about liquidity (market depth)?
  • provide info about volatility?
  • provide info about last trade price?
donator
Activity: 2772
Merit: 1019
intriguing!

Meni, I admire you: you got 2 things in one package that seldom come together: brains and balls. (the brains to think up such a scheme and the balls to actually offer it)

I just don't see yet how you can implement this... will read again and think...
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
Is this the reason for the CFD you recently offered?
No, quite the opposite - ABSORB, forum trust-based CFDs, and POLY are all alternative ways for people to reach their desired position - both me and others - and I'm experimenting to see which one works best. I've started doing this because in general, if I'm bringing capital from the fiat world for Bitcoin investments I want to hedge the exchange rate. Though if POLY ends up scalable and profitable for me on its own, I might also use CFDs to balance the position resulting from it.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
Is this the reason for the CFD you recently offered?
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
Couldn't there as well be a limit price and/or knock out price to limit the risk ?
As I would imagine you have an idea of how far you are willing to stretch this.
I've thought about this and may add it, but currently I don't see a situation where this will be needed and still be fair to investors. Controlling my exposure will be done, if all else fails, by exercising the buyback clause.
hero member
Activity: 609
Merit: 501
peace
interesting thought process. Glad to see you are taking this a step further.
Couldn't there as well be a limit price and/or knock out price to limit the risk ?
As I would imagine you have an idea of how far you are willing to stretch this.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
Will you provide the market maker bot as well?
That's the plan. If someone else does a maker bot, I'll still need to operate a balance bot which will execute trades placed by the maker bot.

What would be a benefit for me as an external trader not associated with you to act as a market maker or would this only make sense for you if you are the market maker yourself?
Your benefit would be the same as in any other market - if the spread is high and the traded price oscillates between the bid and ask, you can buy low and sell high for profit. But for me a maker bot will be even more effective since it can double as a balance bot (and it will improve liquidity, making my offering more attractive).
legendary
Activity: 2618
Merit: 1007
Will you provide the market maker bot as well?

What would be a benefit for me as an external trader not associated with you to act as a market maker or would this only make sense for you if you are the market maker yourself?

donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1054
tl; dr: Every POLY.10.n bond will have a face value of (X/10)^n BTC, where $X USD is the last trade price of BTC on Mt. Gox, and n is a value specific to the particular bond.

Introduction. This instrument emulates BTC/USD margin trading, acting as an alternative to margin trading platforms and as a substitute while they are inactive. Unlike the margin emulation asset ABSORB, POLY is persistent (in principle the same asset can be used indefinitely) and embodies a much clearer effective leverage, allowing traders to more easily control their position.

Operation. Specific bond offerings will include for example POLY.10.1 and POLY.10.-2. In general, every POLY.10.n will have a face value of (X/10)^n BTC, with $X being the last traded price of BTC on Mt. Gox. Bondholders have the right to sell the bonds back to the issuer at their face value.

Position equivalence. Holding 1 BTC worth of POLY.10.n bonds is locally equivalent to holding (n+1) BTC, in the sense that for small a, an increase of $a in the BTC exchange rate causes an increase of $a*(n+1) in the USD worth of the held bonds. Unlike normal margin trading, holding POLY bonds means profits are immediately reinvested in increasing the position, and losses are immediately liquidated and deduct from the position.

To see this, we first consider some trivial cases. POLY.10.0 bonds always have a face value of 1 BTC, and holding 1 BTC worth of the bonds (1 bond) is equivalent to holding 1 BTC. Investing in such bonds is uninteresting, since one may as well keep the bitcoin.

A POLY.10.-1 bond has a face value of (10/X) BTC, and since each BTC is worth $X, each bond is worth $10 regardless of the BTC price, and thus holding a bond is equivalent to holding no BTC at all. This again is uninteresting because one may as well sell the bitcoin for USD.

A POLY.10.1 bond has a face value of (X/10) BTC. 1 BTC gives you (10/X) such bonds, initially worth $X. If the exchange rate rises to $(X+a), the new face value of the bond is (X+a)/10 BTC, so the value of all (10/X) bonds is 1+a/X BTC, which at $(X+a) per BTC is worth $(X+a)(1+a/X) = $(X+2a+a^2/X) ~ $(X+2a), an increase of $2a, so the position implied by 1 BTC of bonds is indeed 2 BTC (so investing in such bonds is equivalent to taking a long position with 2:1 leverage). With the new price of $(X+a) per BTC, the held bonds are now worth 1+a/X BTC, so the position is now 2+2a/X BTC, meaning that the profits have been reinvested in an even longer position. If the trader wishes to maintain the same position, he will have to sell some excess bonds (or buy new bonds in case of loss).

More generally, a POLY.10.n bond has a face value of (X/10)^n BTC. 1 BTC gives you (10/X)^n such bonds, initially worth $X. If the exchange rate rises to $(X+a), the new face value of the bond is ((X+a)/10)^n BTC, so the value of all (10/X)^n bonds is (1+a/X)^n BTC, which at $(X+a) per BTC is worth $(X+a)(1+a/X)^n = $X(1+a/X)^(n+1) = $X(1+(n+1)a/X+O(a^2)) ~ $(X+(n+1)a), an increase of $(n+1)a.

In particular, holding 1 BTC worth of POLY.10.-2 bonds is equivalent to holding -1 BTC, so starting with USD, buying 1 BTC and using that to buy POLY.10.-2, is equivalent to short selling 1 BTC.

Calling. The issuer has the right to buy back the bonds, at a multiple of the face value which varies according to the specific bond. For POLY.10.1 and POLY.10.-2, the multiple will be 120%.

Termination. If the trade prices from Mt. Gox become terminally unreliable, such as if it ceases operations, the bonds will be bought back for their face value, determined by the agreed upon last meaningful trade price.

Challenges. Assuming, as is likely at this point, that the BTC exchange rate will eventually reach either arbitrarily high or arbitrarily low values, it is easy to see that by buying both a ^1 (long) and a ^(-2) (short) bond, the trader is guaranteed profit, meaning the issuer is guaranteed loss.

This is because of the trader's implicit right to to reinvest all profits in extending his position, regardless of the issuer's ability to hedge the position. Normal margin trading platforms have multiple ways to control this. They can simply refuse to extend the position; they can increase the fee; they can charge interest for taking an unfavorable position, and pay out interest for depositing funds they can use for hedging.

With the way the POLY contract is set up, none of this is possible. The issuer has only two mechanisms to handle this: Calling the bonds when the position becomes intolerable, which is expensive; and using the time value of money to compensate for the future losses. Since there is no way to control interest rates, the effectiveness of this is limited.

Since this is risky for the issuer, the offering price of the bonds will have to include compensation for it. The trader will have to weigh the advantages of an unlimited permission to extend his position (up to the issuer's right to call the bonds at a profit to the trader) against the higher price.

Even so, this is only sustainable with a market maker bot constantly balancing the issuer's position, and with enough trading activity to make sure that increases in the face value of a bond can be matched with traders looking to sell bonds.

Series details. As an initial proof of concept, 200 POLY.10.1 bonds will be offered. POLY.10.-2 should soon follow. The IPO is scheduled for June 14 2012, but bonds will start selling only after the necessary preparations are made.

In the future, higher-leveraged bonds might be offered, and additionally, if the price of BTC changes so that the value of each single bond becomes hard to work with, new series such as POLY.100.n may be offered.

Update: Currently POLY.10.1 and POLY.10.-2 are offered.

POLY.10.1: You can buy at 110%, sell at 106%, target is 400 BTC.
POLY.10.-2: You can buy at 104%, sell at 100%, target is 400 BTC.
Pages:
Jump to: