Liquidity Fragmentation and the Price Impact of ETF Flows

Log in to collect

Onsite backtest IDE

Quant Buffet native backtest IDE

Edit and run Quant Buffet Python for Liquidity Fragmentation and the Price Impact of ETF Flows in the browser. Results update live with equity, drawdown, and metrics charts. Allowed: backtest.data, backtest.engine, backtest.metrics, numpy, pandas. Define ASSETS and make_on_day(prices). Shortcut: Ctrl+Enter. API docs →

Ready — edit code, then Run backtest.
IDE · 44 lines
Quant Buffet syntax cheat sheet (copy / insert)

Paste these fragments into the editor. The sandbox rejects QuantConnect, os, and network libraries.

Required imports
Only these libraries are allowed in the sandbox.
from __future__ import annotations

import numpy as np
import pandas as pd

from backtest.data import load_daily_prices
from backtest.engine import EngineConfig, PortfolioEngine
from backtest.metrics import compute_metrics
ASSETS list (whitelisted ETFs)
Module-level list. Tickers must be in the Quant Buffet whitelist.
ASSETS = ["SPY", "QQQ", "TLT", "GLD", "BIL"]
make_on_day contract
Must return (on_day, ready). on_day calls engine.set_target_weights.
def make_on_day(prices: pd.DataFrame):
    cols = [c for c in ASSETS if c in prices.columns]
    sma = prices[cols].rolling(200, min_periods=200).mean()
    state = {"last": None}

    def on_day(engine: PortfolioEngine, dt: pd.Timestamp) -> None:
        if sma.loc[dt].isna().all():
            return
        key = (dt.year, dt.month)
        if state["last"] == key:
            return
        state["last"] = key
        long = [
            s for s in cols
            if pd.notna(prices.at[dt, s]) and pd.notna(sma.at[dt, s])
            and prices.at[dt, s] > sma.at[dt, s]
        ]
        weights = {} if not long else {s: 1.0 / len(long) for s in long}
        engine.set_target_weights(dt, weights)

    ready = sma.dropna(how="all").index.min() if sma.notna().any().any() else None
    return on_day, ready
Set target weights
Weights should sum to about 1.0. Empty dict = 100% cash.
engine.set_target_weights(dt, {"SPY": 0.60, "BIL": 0.40})

Live backtest performance

CAGR
-12.68%
Sharpe
-0.01
Max DD
-92.52%
Vol
50.73%
Sortino
-0.01
Beta
0.68

Showing saved draft baseline until you re-run.

Equity curve (indexed = 100)

Accent = strategy · dashed grey = buy-and-hold benchmark

2014-102026-0847315
Drawdown
Worst -88.5%-89%
Metrics bar chart
CAGRSharpeSortinoVol|DD|Grey = baseline · Accent = live run
Monthly returns
2023-042026-08 · last 24 months

Export to your platform

Transform Quant Buffet lab code (ASSETS + make_on_day / PortfolioEngine) into native classes for a third-party IDE — then copy and paste.

Run in: QuantConnect Cloud or LEAN CLI · QCAlgorithm with Equity securities and monthly rebalance.

Detected pattern: Mean reversionAssets: SPY, TLT, GLD, BIL
# Generated from Quant Buffet → QuantConnect LEAN
# Strategy: Liquidity Fragmentation and the Price Impact of ETF Flows
# Detected pattern: Mean reversion
# Source uses Quant Buffet lab APIs (ASSETS + make_on_day / PortfolioEngine).
# Review fees, data, and risk before live trading — educational export only.

from AlgorithmImports import *


class QuantBuffetExport(QCAlgorithm):
    def Initialize(self):
        self.SetStartDate(2010, 1, 1)
        self.SetCash(100000)
        tickers = ["SPY", "TLT", "GLD", "BIL"]
        self.symbols = []
        for t in tickers:
            if "-" in t:  # crypto proxy e.g. BTC-USD
                self.symbols.append(self.AddCrypto(t.replace("-USD", ""), Resolution.Daily).Symbol)
            else:
                self.symbols.append(self.AddEquity(t, Resolution.Daily).Symbol)
        self.Schedule.On(
            self.DateRules.MonthStart(self.symbols[0]),
            self.TimeRules.AfterMarketOpen(self.symbols[0], 30),
            self.Rebalance,
        )
        # Logic: Buy when return z-score < -1 over 20 days.

    def Rebalance(self):
        import numpy as np
        picks = []
        for symbol in self.symbols:
            hist = self.History(symbol, 20 + 5, Resolution.Daily)
            if hist.empty: continue
            close = hist["close"]
            if hasattr(close, "unstack"):
                close = close.unstack(level=0).iloc[:, 0]
            rets = close.pct_change().dropna()
            if len(rets) < 20: continue
            window = rets.iloc[-20:]
            z = (window.iloc[-1] - window.mean()) / (window.std() or 1e-9)
            if z < -1:
                picks.append(symbol)
        w = 1.0 / len(picks) if picks else 0.0
        for symbol in self.symbols:
            self.SetHoldings(symbol, w if symbol in picks else 0.0)

Exported code uses the platform’s native classes and libraries. Install dependencies in your third-party IDE, then run. Validate before live trading.

Academic paper

Teaser

Enter when short-horizon z-score is deeply negative; exit near zero. Universe: BTC-USD, ETH-USD. Parameters: lookback=20; entry_z=-1.0; exit_z=0.0; rebalance=daily. Rebalanced on the engine's template schedule with 5 bps commission and 2 bps slippage.

Strategy in a nutshell

This paper develops a theoretical model of price impact in fragmented cryptocurrency markets, where ETF-driven order flow must be routed across heterogeneous exchanges with varying liquidity depth. Extending Kyle (1985) to a multi-venue setting, I derive an aggregate price impact function that is linear for moderate flows but becomes convex when flows exceed any single venue's capacity. The model generates four testable predictions: (1) linear price impact for moderate flows, (2) volatility amplification, (3) permanent price impact with no reversal, and (4) flow-driven return momentum. Using 563 trading days of net flow data from all U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs (January 2024-April 2026), sourced from Farside Investors, I confirm all four predictions. An instrumental variables approach using lag

Economic rationale

Short-horizon overreaction produces temporary dislocations that reverse toward a local mean. Related evidence from “Liquidity Fragmentation and the Price Impact of ETF Flows: A Model of Cross-Venue Arbitrage in Cryptocurrency Markets”: This paper develops a theoretical model of price impact in fragmented cryptocurrency markets, where ETF-driven order flow must be routed across heterogeneous exchanges with varying liquidity depth. Extending Kyle (1985) to a multi-venue setting, I derive an aggregate price impact function that is linear for moderate flows but becomes convex when flows exceed any single venue's capacity. The model generates four testable predictions: (1) linear price impact for moderate flows, (2) volatility ampl

Backtest performance

Annualised return-12.68%
Volatility50.73%
Beta0.68
Sharpe ratio-0.01
Sortino ratio-0.01
Maximum drawdown-92.52%