Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: It is better for the short sell competition to have ZERO(?) precision on APR !  (Read 311 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline liondani


Now the precision to set a higher interest rate (APR) is set to two digit's... example  6.21%
but practical it's not fair !!!   Explanation and example:

I want to out compete a short order of $5000 that has set the APR value to 14.01%
with my $1000 order (or less)... I can do that setting a APR at 14.02 !!!
Effectively my smaller order out-compete a much bigger order with "zero" sacrifice from my  part, just +0.01% that means 10 cents yearly !!!

The same example with zero precision  means that my competitor with the $5000 short order at 14% will loose the race only if I
set the APR for my $1000 at 15% or above (if I set it to 14% I loose because it's less bitUSDs order) that means in this case I must "sacrifice" a + 1% that is $10 annually....

That would increase competition/paricipation from investors/users in my opinion because right now only investors with much free time that can change several time their orders in front of their monitor have a motive to participate...and we will loose them too if trading bots are present on our exchange that out-compete them for just a couple of cents...


PS @bytemaster If you think zero precision is to low make it at least to one digit...   5.1% , 5.2%, 7.2% etc..
« Last Edit: November 07, 2014, 08:17:21 AM by liondani »
  https://bitshares.OPENLEDGER.info/?r=GREECE  | You are in Control | BUY | SELL | SHORT | SWAP | LOAN | TRADE |  

Online fluxer555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile
I think more granularity is good, however I see the problem here. Most bidding/auction environments implement a 'minimum increment' to solve this. How about this...

if (my APR) > (their APR):
    if (my APR) < (their APR) + 0.25%:
        if (my order size) > (their order size):
            return "My order is prioritized above their order."
        else:
            return "Their order is prioritized above my order."
    else:
        return "My order is prioritized above their order."
else:
    return "Their order is prioritized above my order."


In other words, your order's APR has to be 0.25% above theirs to take priority no matter what. If your order's APR is above their order BUT less than 0.25% above it, then it only takes priority if the order is bigger.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2014, 06:00:14 PM by fluxer555 »
BTS: boolean-julien

Online biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 780
  • Incentives run the world
    • View Profile
  • BTS: zebulon
Why do you think this is a problem here but not in the general market mechanism? If I want to buy bitUSD, I only need to offer a tiny fraction of a BTS more than the last guy and that puts me on top of the order book. Why do you think interest rates offered should be different?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2


Offline liondani

Why do you think this is a problem here but not in the general market mechanism? If I want to buy bitUSD, I only need to offer a tiny fraction of a BTS more than the last guy and that puts me on top of the order book. Why do you think interest rates offered should be different?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

You are right, identical "issue" there. Could both change...
  https://bitshares.OPENLEDGER.info/?r=GREECE  | You are in Control | BUY | SELL | SHORT | SWAP | LOAN | TRADE |  

Offline bytemaster

Why do you think this is a problem here but not in the general market mechanism? If I want to buy bitUSD, I only need to offer a tiny fraction of a BTS more than the last guy and that puts me on top of the order book. Why do you think interest rates offered should be different?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

You are right, identical "issue" there. Could both change...

Nope... we are operating on you get what you paid for.  If you force prices into buckets then you need to prioritize within a bucket....  then it becomes first come or random.   

For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Online biophil

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 780
  • Incentives run the world
    • View Profile
  • BTS: zebulon
Why do you think this is a problem here but not in the general market mechanism? If I want to buy bitUSD, I only need to offer a tiny fraction of a BTS more than the last guy and that puts me on top of the order book. Why do you think interest rates offered should be different?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

You are right, identical "issue" there. Could both change...

Nope... we are operating on you get what you paid for.  If you force prices into buckets then you need to prioritize within a bucket....  then it becomes first come or random.

And from a purely practical standpoint, shorting is confusing enough for most people. If we suddenly add more rules, it will make it even harder to understand what is going on. Let's keep it as simple as possible.

Offline liondani

Why do you think this is a problem here but not in the general market mechanism? If I want to buy bitUSD, I only need to offer a tiny fraction of a BTS more than the last guy and that puts me on top of the order book. Why do you think interest rates offered should be different?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

You are right, identical "issue" there. Could both change...


Nope... we are operating on you get what you paid for.  If you force prices into buckets then you need to prioritize within a bucket....  then it becomes first come or random.

ok, and what about the precision? It is simpler and the same is true... "you get what you paid for"... you don't break any rule and it's not more complicated.
  https://bitshares.OPENLEDGER.info/?r=GREECE  | You are in Control | BUY | SELL | SHORT | SWAP | LOAN | TRADE |  

Online fluxer555

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 658
    • View Profile
Why do you think this is a problem here but not in the general market mechanism? If I want to buy bitUSD, I only need to offer a tiny fraction of a BTS more than the last guy and that puts me on top of the order book. Why do you think interest rates offered should be different?

Sent from my SCH-S720C using Tapatalk 2

You are right, identical "issue" there. Could both change...

Nope... we are operating on you get what you paid for.  If you force prices into buckets then you need to prioritize within a bucket....  then it becomes first come or random.

I actually like this idea. Like I said in my previous post, you could make the buckets in 0.25 intervals, and you could prioritize within a bucket like this:

1. Volume
2. First-come

I think this would make the required maintenance for being a competitive shorter much lower, while simultaneously increasing competition.

It's important to note that we still have buckets with the current system, just they are very very small (every 0.01%). The only thing you get out of it is finer granularity, which has what value?
« Last Edit: November 07, 2014, 09:34:56 PM by fluxer555 »
BTS: boolean-julien

 

Google+