IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-04531639.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Reconciling Open Interest with Traded Volume in Perpetual Swaps

Author

Listed:
  • Ioannis Giagkiozis

    (Chrysor Trading)

  • Emilio Said

    (ADIA - Abu Dhabi Investment Authority)

Abstract

Perpetual swaps are derivative contracts that allow traders to speculate on, or hedge, the price movements of cryptocurrencies. Unlike futures contracts, perpetual swaps have no settlement or expiration in the traditional sense. The funding rate acts as the mechanism that tethers the perpetual swap to its underlying with the help of arbitrageurs. Open interest, in the context of perpetual swaps and derivative contracts in general, refers to the total number of outstanding contracts at a given point in time. It is a critical metric in derivatives markets as it can provide insight into market activity, sentiment and overall liquidity. It also provides a way to estimate a lower bound on the collateral required for every cryptocurrency market on an exchange. This number, cumulated across all markets on the exchange in combination with proof of reserves, can be used to gauge whether the exchange in question operates with unsustainable levels of leverage, which could have solvency implications. We find that open interest in Bitcoin perpetual swaps is systematically misquoted by some of the largest derivatives exchanges; however, the degree varies, with some exchanges reporting open interest that is wholly implausible to others that seem to be delaying messages of forced trades, i.e., liquidations. We identify these incongruities by analyzing tick-by-tick data for two time periods in 2023 by connecting directly to seven of the most liquid cryptocurrency derivatives exchanges.

Suggested Citation

  • Ioannis Giagkiozis & Emilio Said, 2024. "Reconciling Open Interest with Traded Volume in Perpetual Swaps," Post-Print hal-04531639, HAL.
    • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04531639
    DOI: 10.5195/LEDGER.2024.325
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-04531639
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-04531639/document
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5195/LEDGER.2024.325?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Weili Chen & Jun Wu & Zibin Zheng & Chuan Chen & Yuren Zhou, 2019. "Market Manipulation of Bitcoin: Evidence from Mining the Mt. Gox Transaction Network," Papers 1902.01941, arXiv.org.
    2. Kenneth A. Kim & Jungsoo Park, 2010. "Why Do Price Limits Exist in Stock Markets? A Manipulation†Based Explanation," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 16(2), pages 296-318, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Manhwa Wu & Paoyu Huang & Yensen Ni, 2020. "The Impact of Institutional Shareholdings on Price Limits," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 27(3), pages 343-361, September.
    2. Saggese, Pietro & Belmonte, Alessandro & Dimitri, Nicola & Facchini, Angelo & Böhme, Rainer, 2023. "Arbitrageurs in the Bitcoin ecosystem: Evidence from user-level trading patterns in the Mt. Gox exchange platform," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 251-270.
    3. Tsang, Kwok Ping & Yang, Zichao, 2022. "Do connections pay off in the bitcoin market?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 1-18.
    4. James Brugler & Oliver Linton, 2014. "Single stock circuit breakers on the London Stock Exchange: do they improve subsequent market quality?," CeMMAP working papers CWP07/14, Centre for Microdata Methods and Practice, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
    5. Karl Oton Rudolf & Samer Ajour El Zein & Nicola Jackman Lansdowne, 2021. "Bitcoin as an Investment and Hedge Alternative. A DCC MGARCH Model Analysis," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-22, August.
    6. Boyd, Naomi E. & Harris, Jeffrey H. & Li, Bingxin, 2018. "An update on speculation and financialization in commodity markets," Journal of Commodity Markets, Elsevier, vol. 10(C), pages 91-104.
    7. Sun, Ping-Wen & Cai, Yingying, 2024. "Influence of a wider trading range on stock price efficiency: Evidence from ChiNext stocks in China," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    8. Pawan Jain & Wen-Jun Xue, 2017. "Global Investigation of Return Autocorrelation and its Determinants," Working Papers 1704, Florida International University, Department of Economics.
    9. Ji, Qiang & Bouri, Elie & Kristoufek, Ladislav & Lucey, Brian, 2021. "Realised volatility connectedness among Bitcoin exchange markets," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 38(C).
    10. Oliver Linton & Soheil Mahmoodzadeh, 2018. "Implications of High-Frequency Trading for Security Markets," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 10(1), pages 237-259, August.
    11. Jennifer N. Carpenter & Fangzhou Lu & Robert F. Whitelaw, 2015. "The Real Value of China's Stock Market," NBER Working Papers 20957, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Seza Danışoğlu & Z. Nuray Güner, 2018. "Do price limits help control stock price volatility?," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 260(1), pages 129-157, January.
    13. Hsin, Chin-Wen & Peng, Shu-Cing, 2023. "Investor propensity to speculate and price delay in emerging markets," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 86(C).
    14. Halim Dabbou & Ahmed Silem, 2014. "Price limit and financial contagion: protection or illusion? The tunisian stock exchange case," Post-Print hal-00925424, HAL.
    15. Carpenter, Jennifer N. & Lu, Fangzhou & Whitelaw, Robert F., 2021. "The real value of China’s stock market," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(3), pages 679-696.
    16. Sifat, Imtiaz Mohammad & Mohamad, Azhar, 2020. "A survey on the magnet effect of circuit breakers in financial markets," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 138-151.
    17. Ni, Yensen & Huang, Paoyu, 2015. "Do IPOs matter for price limits? Evidence from Taiwan," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 58(C), pages 74-83.
    18. Ma, Yu & Qian, Wenyu & Luan, Zhiqian, 2021. "Could increasing price limits reduce up limit herding? Evidence from China's capital market reform," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    19. Park, Seongkyu “Gilbert” & Suen, Wing & Wan, Kam-Ming, 2022. "Call auction design and closing price manipulation: Evidence from the Hong Kong stock exchange," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 58(C).
    20. Imtiaz Mohammad Sifat & Azhar Mohamad, 2019. "Circuit breakers as market stability levers: A survey of research, praxis, and challenges," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 24(3), pages 1130-1169, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Bitcoin; Derivatives; Open Interest; Trading; Perpetual Swaps; Exchanges;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-04531639. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.