This article validates a market simulation and calibration procedure using real-world historical data from the Hong Kong exchange (HKEX).This article validates a market simulation and calibration procedure using real-world historical data from the Hong Kong exchange (HKEX).

Analyzing Historical Trading Data: Applying Simulation-Based Inference to HKEX

2025/09/06 10:21

Abstract and 1. Introduction

2. Relevant Work

3. Methods

3.1 Models

3.2 Summarising Features

3.3 Calibration of Market Model Parameters

4. Experiments

4.1 Zero Intelligence Trader

4.2 Extended Chiarella

4.3 Historical Data

5. Discussion & Future Work

6. Significance, Acknowledgments, and References

4.3 Historical Data

Having demonstrated that we are able to calibrate synthetic data using neural density estimators and embedding networks, we next use our calibration procedure to identify model parameters specific to a single day of trading. We use data from the Hong Kong exchange (HKEX) which reflects a standard trading day. We first evaluate the stylised facts on the historical data to see which are supported and which are violated. As shown in Figure 2, we see that (a) log returns follow a typical normal distribution at medium timescales (minutes) but that this departs from normality as we shorten the timescale (seconds), resulting an increase in kurtosis. Additionally, when calculating the skewness at both timescales, we observe a slight asymmetry (0.44).

\ Shown in Figure 2(c), we observe an absence of autocorrelation in the return series, in (d), a positive correlation between volume and volatility and in (e) we see significant volatility clustering at high lag number. We also observe intermittency in historical data, a large Hurst exponent (0.8) and that the autocorrelation of absolute returns rapidly converges to zero reflecting that the historical data has no long range memory or dependencies, and the order book volumes approximate a Gamma distribution, where 𝛾 = 0.014, 0.018 for bid and ask orders, respectively. However, we also note that some stylised facts are not observed in this data, such as a negative correlation between returns and volatility, and significant concavity in the price impact function, which is essentially flat at 0.07.

\ In Figure 4, we show the estimated posterior distribution for the historical data using the VWAP from the fist level of the LOB. We again observe that parameters for the fundamental trader and noise trader are constrained, whereas those for the momentum trader have high uncertainty. Interestingly, we see that the decay rate for high frequency traders has reduced uncertainty, indicating that high frequency behaviours may be significant in this trading day. Future work will investigate this. Shown in Figure 2, we are again able to reproduce several of the stylised facts, including (a) the heavy tails and normality of log returns, (c) the absence of auto-correlations in return series, and (e) a strong correlation between volume and volatility, as well as intermittency, no long range memory (where the Hurst exponent is 0.76) or dependencies of absolute returns, and a Gamma distribution in the order book volume (where 𝛾 = 0.28 for both bid and ask orders). Interestingly, we observe that our simulator is able to recreate stylised facts that are not present in the historical data such as negative correlation between returns and volatility and a stronger asymmetry in returns (-0.95). We again observe that the price impact function is approximately flat (0.01). The only stylised fact that is observed less strongly in our simulator is the volatility clustering, shown in Figure 2(f), which decreases with increasing lag but is not consistently positive.

\ We next use the historical data to estimate the posterior for the ZI trader model, as shown in Figure 5. We find that the parameter values are constrained with similar uncertainties as observed when using synthetic data. We again see a sharp bi-modality in the rate at which market orders are submitted that spans the prior. When calculating the stylised facts, we observe the same behaviours as with the extended Chiarella model. However, the price impact function is now convex (with coefficient -0.25) and where there is negligible correlation between returns and volatility (correlation coefficient is -0.0005).

\

:::info Authors:

(1) Namid R. Stillman, Simudyne Limited, United Kingdom ([email protected]);

(2) Rory Baggott, Simudyne Limited, United Kingdom ([email protected]);

(3) Justin Lyon, Simudyne Limited, United Kingdom ([email protected]);

(4) Jianfei Zhang, Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited, Hong Kong ([email protected]);

(5) Dingqiu Zhu, Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited, Hong Kong ([email protected]);

(6) Tao Chen, Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing Limited, Hong Kong ([email protected]);

(7) Perukrishnen Vytelingum, Simudyne Limited, United Kingdom ([email protected]).

:::


:::info This paper is available on arxiv under CC BY 4.0 DEED license.

:::

\

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

The Future of Secure Messaging: Why Decentralization Matters

The Future of Secure Messaging: Why Decentralization Matters

The post The Future of Secure Messaging: Why Decentralization Matters appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. From encrypted chats to decentralized messaging Encrypted messengers are having a second wave. Apps like WhatsApp, iMessage and Signal made end-to-end encryption (E2EE) a default expectation. But most still hinge on phone numbers, centralized servers and a lot of metadata, such as who you talk to, when, from which IP and on which device. That is what Vitalik Buterin is aiming at in his recent X post and donation. He argues the next steps for secure messaging are permissionless account creation with no phone numbers or Know Your Customer (KYC) and much stronger metadata privacy. In that context he highlighted Session and SimpleX and sent 128 Ether (ETH) to each to keep pushing in that direction. Session is a good case study because it tries to combine E2E encryption with decentralization. There is no central message server, traffic is routed through onion paths, and user IDs are keys instead of phone numbers. Did you know? Forty-three percent of people who use public WiFi report experiencing a data breach, with man-in-the-middle attacks and packet sniffing against unencrypted traffic among the most common causes. How Session stores your messages Session is built around public key identities. When you sign up, the app generates a keypair locally and derives a Session ID from it with no phone number or email required. Messages travel through a network of service nodes using onion routing so that no single node can see both the sender and the recipient. (You can see your message’s node path in the settings.) For asynchronous delivery when you are offline, messages are stored in small groups of nodes called “swarms.” Each Session ID is mapped to a specific swarm, and your messages are stored there encrypted until your client fetches them. Historically, messages had a default time-to-live of about two weeks…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/08 14:40
Grayscale Files Sui Trust as 21Shares Launches First SUI ETF Amid Rising Demand

Grayscale Files Sui Trust as 21Shares Launches First SUI ETF Amid Rising Demand

The post Grayscale Files Sui Trust as 21Shares Launches First SUI ETF Amid Rising Demand appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. The Grayscale Sui Trust filing and 21Shares’ launch of the first SUI ETF highlight surging interest in regulated Sui investments. These products offer investors direct exposure to the SUI token through spot-style structures, simplifying access to the Sui blockchain’s growth without direct custody needs, amid expanding altcoin ETF options. Grayscale’s spot Sui Trust seeks to track SUI price performance for long-term holders. 21Shares’ SUI ETF provides leveraged exposure, targeting traders with 2x daily returns. Early trading data shows over 4,700 shares exchanged, with volumes exceeding $24 per unit in the debut session. Explore Grayscale Sui Trust filing and 21Shares SUI ETF launch: Key developments in regulated Sui investments for 2025. Stay informed on altcoin ETF trends. What is the Grayscale Sui Trust? The Grayscale Sui Trust is a proposed spot-style investment product filed via S-1 registration with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, aimed at providing investors with direct exposure to the SUI token’s price movements. This trust mirrors the performance of SUI, the native cryptocurrency of the Sui blockchain, minus applicable fees, offering a regulated avenue for long-term participation in the network’s ecosystem. By holding SUI assets on behalf of investors, it eliminates the need for individuals to manage token storage or transactions directly. ⚡ LATEST: GRAYSCALE FILES S-1 FOR $SUI TRUSTThe “Grayscale Sui Trust,” is a spot-style ETF designed to provide direct exposure to the $SUI token. Grayscale’s goal is to mirror SUI’s market performance, minus fees, giving long-term investors a regulated, hassle-free way to… pic.twitter.com/mPQMINLrYC — CryptosRus (@CryptosR_Us) December 6, 2025 How does the 21Shares SUI ETF differ from traditional funds? The 21Shares SUI ETF, launched under the ticker TXXS, introduces a leveraged approach with 2x daily exposure to SUI’s price fluctuations, utilizing derivatives for amplified returns rather than direct spot holdings. This structure appeals to short-term…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/12/08 14:20