Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2610.15973

Requested, Executed and Recoverable Credit: Shared Action Ordering among LLM Borrowers in a Simulated Lending Market

Abstract

AI agents built on different language models can still share the software that presents their choices. We study one shared component, the order in which a borrowing agent's actions are listed, in a simulated collateralized lending market populated by three open-weight model families. In fixed decision states, moving the borrowing action from last to first raises valid borrowing requests by 27 percentage points. In 12 matched pairs of 15-agent markets, all agents in one market see the same order; the other spreads the six possible orders across agents. A common order moves whole markets: the four markets that listed borrowing first raised net debt by 1.8 to 2.7 times their initial unused borrowing capacity, while those that listed debt reduction first cut debt. These groups account for 96 percent of the sample variation among common markets, whose standard deviation is three times the balanced one. The borrowing cap stops 40 percent of valid borrowing requests made when borrowing is listed first, but it values collateral at the pool price, so correlated purchases raise borrowing capacity and leave positions above 70 percent of reference value. Under a 30 percent shock, an 8 percent liquidation bonus produces write-offs on loans that are fully collateralized before liquidation, and liquidation triggers that read the pool price add exposure. Common ordering does not put more borrowers into the write-off zone; it concentrates them in the markets whose shared order favored borrowing. Collateral valuation and liquidation rules determine how much of it creditors fail to recover.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Victoria Ruojie Li. 2026-10-11. Requested, Executed and Recoverable Credit: Shared Action Ordering among LLM Borrowers in a Simulated Lending Market. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.15973

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Rating criteria, risk measures, and risk consistency

Categorical ratings are widely used by investors to screen financial products, such as defaultable securities and investment funds. We model rating criteria as discrete transforms of risk measures, and introduce and study several natural notions of risk consistency that promote prudent investment decisions. Three closely related notions of risk consistency are considered: with respect to risk aversion, the asset pooling effect, and the benefit of portfolio diversification. These notions can be formulated under multiple probability measures. For both the monetary and positive homogeneous (MPH) and state-dependent expected utility (SEU) classes, we show how these properties translate between rating criteria and their corresponding risk measures, and establish a hierarchical structure among the properties. These findings lead to full characterizations for the Choquet subclass of MPH criteria and for SEU criteria. Illustrated by case studies on collateralized loan obligations and investment funds, some classes of risk-consistent scenario-based criteria can serve as useful alternatives to the probability of default and expected loss criteria used in practice for rating financial products.

q-fin.RM↗

Risk Measures for the Climate Transition Age: Why Symmetric Risk Budgets are unlikely to mitigate two-dimensionally asymmetric Climate Change risks

The most widely used investment risk measures - variance, standard deviation, and tracking error - treat upside deviations as equally undesirable as downside losses. In stable markets with assumed symmetric return distributions, this simplification is potentially harmless. In the climate transition age, it is not. Climate risk is two-dimensionally asymmetric, across assets and over time. Both dimensions are negatively skewed against investors. Hence, climate transition investment strategies deliberately deviate from benchmarks that reflect an insufficiently decarbonising global economy. When fiduciaries enforce tracking error budgets that penalise outperformance just as heavily as underperformance, they inadvertently constrain exactly the portfolio return opportunities that climate-aware investing seeks. We argue that replacing symmetric deviation-based risk measures with their downside-only counterparts - semi-variance, standard risk and trailing error - resolves this conflict without sacrificing any fiduciary discipline. The distinction is not merely semantic: as the gap between climate transition trajectories and market benchmarks widens over the coming decades, symmetric risk budgets will become binding constraints on transition strategies well before actual investment risk warrants it. We propose specific changes to mandate design that would allow institutional investors to pursue climate transition opportunities within genuinely risk-aware (rather than deviation-averse) frameworks.

q-fin.RM↗

Rough Martingale Optimal Transport: Theory, Implementation, and Regulatory Applications for Non-Modelable Risk Factors

The Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) poses a significant challenge for exotic derivatives pricing, particularly for non-modelable risk factors (NMRF) where sparse market data leads to infinite audit bounds under classical Martingale Optimal Transport (MOT). We propose a unified Rough Martingale Optimal Transport (RMOT) framework that regularizes the transport plan with a rough volatility prior, yielding finite, explicit, and asymptotically tight extrapolation bounds. We establish an identifiability theorem for rough volatility parameters under sparse data, proving that 50 strikes are sufficient to estimate the Hurst exponent within $\pm 0.05$. For the multi-asset case, we prove that the correlation matrix is locally identifiable from marginal option surfaces provided the Hurst exponents are distinct. Model calibration on SPY and QQQ options (2019--2024) confirms that the optimal martingale measure exhibits stretched exponential tail decay ($\sim\exp(-k^{1-H})$), consistent with rough volatility asymptotics, whereas classical MOT yields trivial bounds. We validate the framework on live SPX/NDX data and scale it to $N = 30$ assets using a block-sparse optimization algorithm. Empirical results show that RMOT provides approximately \$880M in capital relief per \$1B exotic book compared to classical methods, while maintaining conservative coverage confirmed by 100-seed cross-validation. This constitutes a pricing framework designed to align with FRTB principles for NMRFs with explicit error quantification.

q-fin.RM↗