{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.026013771996939557, 'fraction_numerical': 0.001530221882172915, 'mean_word_length': 4.891891891891892, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The impact of aggressive orders in an order-driven market: a simulation approach

This article investigates resiliency in an order-driven market. On basis of a vector autoregressive model capturing various dimensions of liquidity and their interactions, I simulate the effect of a large liquidity shock, measured by a very aggressive market order. I show that, despite the absence of market makers, the market is resilient. All dimensions of liquidity (spread, depth at the best prices and order book imbalances) revert to their steady-state values within 15 orders after the shock. For prices, a long run effect is found. Furthermore, different dimensions of liquidity interact. Immediately after a liquidity shock, the spread becomes wider than in the steady state, implying that one dimension of liquidity deteriorates, while at the same time, depth at the best prices increases, meaning an improvement of another liquidity dimension. In subsequent periods, the spread reverts back to the steady-state level but also depth decreases. Also, I find evidence for asymmetries in the impact of shocks on the ask and bid side. Shocks on the ask side have a stronger impact than shocks on the bid side. Finally, resiliency is higher for less-frequently traded stocks and stocks with a larger relative tick size.