63 likes
·
5.1K reads
9 comments
I really appreciate the depth of your article, Aleksei! How do you handle the computational challenges of dynamically updating the arbitrage paths when dealing with a high-frequency data feed, particularly on networks like Ethereum with fast-changing conditions?
Thank you! Handling the dynamic nature of fast-moving networks like Ethereum requires a combination of real-time data processing and efficient path recalculation. I use a streaming algorithm to update path profitability in near real-time as price updates come in. By maintaining a priority queue of paths ranked by their last known profitability, the algorithm can quickly adjust to changing conditions. Additionally, I employ lazy evaluation, recalculating the profit only for paths likely to still be profitable, which reduces the overall computational load.
Fantastic work, Aleksei! I’m curious about your thoughts on using probabilistic models for estimating the likelihood of successful arbitrage trades. How do you integrate probability into your decision-making process?
Thank you for the question! This is indeed a broad topic, worthy of separate research as there are many ways to integrate probabilistic models into arbitrage strategies. I believe a strong approach is to maximize the expected profit at the algorithm level, using probabilities derived from the models mentioned earlier. By focusing on the expected value, you can align your strategy with the likelihood of success, optimizing for the best possible outcome given the uncertainties in the market. This allows for a more informed and calculated approach to arbitrage, ultimately leading to more consistent and sustainable profitability.
Incredible insights, Aleksei! Regarding the constant product formula used in UniswapV2, how do you handle situations where the reserves are near depletion? Do you have a specific method for adjusting your arbitrage calculations when the liquidity is critically low?
Thank you for the great question! Strictly speaking, trading on UniswapV2 pairs with low liquidity in my algorithm doesn't differ from trading on "regular" pairs. We account for all potential profits with the highest possible accuracy. When solving the optimization problem, we do so with constraints that limit the search space to transaction sizes that all pairs can handle. During the search, we prioritize high-liquidity pairs, as they are more reliable and frequently offer arbitrage opportunities. This means that paths involving low-liquidity pairs are naturally filtered out, except in rare cases where an imbalance on these pairs creates a profitable arbitrage opportunity.
Thank you for the article! As a beginner in the world of algorithmic trading and HFT, I found your insights incredibly helpful and easy to understand. Your work is making a complex subject much more accessible. Keep up the great work!
Thank you for the insightful article, Aleksei! I’m curious how you estimate the gas fee in your arbitrage strategy, especially considering the fluctuating gas prices on networks like Ethereum. How do you ensure that gas costs don’t eat into your arbitrage profits, particularly in a high-frequency trading context?
Thank you for your question! Estimating gas fees accurately is crucial in maintaining profitability, especially in a volatile environment like Ethereum. I approach this by integrating real-time gas price tracking with predictive modeling based on historical data. The model helps forecast likely gas price ranges during the execution of my arbitrage strategy. Additionally, I implement a dynamic bidding strategy, where the gas bid is adjusted according to the expected profit margin of the trade. This way, I can ensure that I’m not overbidding and eroding my profits, while still staying competitive in the gas auction to secure timely execution. This balance is key to sustaining profitability in high-frequency scenarios.