Risk-Aware Linear Bandits in Algorithmic Trading

Introduction

Financial markets operate in an environment of constant uncertainty, where institutional traders, brokers, and asset managers must make real-time decisions that balance potential rewards with associated risks. The increasing availability of financial data has led to a shift from traditional model-driven approaches to machine learning-based decision-making, which can dynamically adapt to market conditions while requiring fewer assumptions about the underlying data distribution. Among these methods, multi-armed bandits (MABs) have emerged as a powerful framework for sequential decision-making in trading and portfolio optimization.

MABs provide a structured approach to learning optimal actions over time by balancing exploration (gathering more information) and exploitation (leveraging existing knowledge for profit). In finance, this paradigm is particularly useful for smart order routing (SOR)—a process that determines the best way to execute trades across multiple venues, including public exchanges (lit pools) and private trading platforms (dark pools). However, standard MAB models often focus solely on maximizing expected returns, which does not align with the risk-sensitive nature of financial decision-making. Many institutional traders prioritize reducing variance in returns and managing worst-case losses, making risk-aware learning strategies essential.

In their paper Risk-Aware Linear Bandits: Theory and Applications in Smart Order Routing, Jingwei Ji, Renyuan Xu, and Ruihao Zhu propose a novel framework for integrating risk-awareness into linear bandits, introducing two algorithms—Risk-Aware Explore-then-Commit (RISE) and Risk-Aware Successive Elimination (RISE++). These algorithms address key challenges in financial decision-making:

1. Incorporating risk into learning models by using the mean-variance framework, ensuring that algorithms consider both expected returns and uncertainty.
2. Handling large action spaces, a common issue in trading, where decisions must be made from a vast number of possible order-splitting strategies across venues.
3. Improving regret bounds, allowing traders to achieve better execution performance compared to standard MAB approaches.

By leveraging a linear bandit structure, RISE and RISE++ reduce regret and improve decision quality while maintaining computational efficiency. The authors validate their approach through synthetic experiments and real-world testing on the NASDAQ ITCH dataset, demonstrating that their algorithms significantly outperform existing methods in SOR scenarios.

This article explores the key contributions of Ji, Xu, and Zhu’s research, providing a structured breakdown of risk-aware linear bandits and their applications in algorithmic trading. We begin with an overview of multi-armed bandits and risk-sensitive learning, followed by an in-depth discussion of RISE and RISE++, their theoretical foundations, and their practical implications for financial markets. Finally, we examine empirical results and discuss how these models can be implemented in real-world trading systems.

Understanding Risk-Aware Linear Bandits

Financial decision-making involves balancing expected rewards with risk exposure, a challenge that extends across portfolio optimization, trading execution, and market making. Traditional multi-armed bandit (MAB) models have been widely applied to sequential decision-making problems, where an agent must repeatedly choose actions while learning from past outcomes. However, most classical bandit models focus solely on reward maximization, ignoring the risk-sensitive nature of financial environments.

Risk-aware linear bandits offer a structured approach to trading off risk and reward by incorporating uncertainty into the decision-making process. This section explores the core principles behind risk-aware bandits, their mathematical foundations, and their application in smart order routing (SOR).

The Foundations of Multi-Armed Bandits in Finance

Multi-armed bandits (MABs) originate from a reinforcement learning framework where an agent selects an action from a set of options (arms), observes a reward, and refines future decisions based on past outcomes. The primary challenge in MABs is the exploration-exploitation tradeoff—whether to select an option that has yielded high rewards in the past (exploitation) or try a new option to gather more information (exploration).

In finance, this tradeoff appears in multiple domains:

• Portfolio selection – Allocating capital among different assets while balancing diversification.
• Market making – Quoting bid-ask spreads to maximize profits while managing inventory risk.
• Trade execution – Selecting optimal order routing strategies to minimize transaction costs.

A classic example of bandits in finance is dynamic trade execution, where a trader must decide how to split an order across multiple venues. The goal is to minimize slippage and impact while maximizing execution quality. However, traditional bandit models do not account for market volatility, liquidity constraints, or execution risk, which are fundamental in real-world trading.

The Shift to Risk-Aware Strategies

Most standard MAB models assume reward optimization as the sole objective. In contrast, risk-aware bandits introduce mechanisms to balance return maximization with uncertainty minimization. This shift is particularly relevant for financial applications where traders and institutions are often risk-averse, meaning they seek stable returns with controlled downside risk rather than purely maximizing expected profits.

Key Limitations of Traditional Bandits in Finance

1. No control over variance: Standard MABs optimize for the highest expected reward but do not account for reward variance, leading to unpredictable outcomes.
2. Inability to model downside risk: High-reward strategies may also have extreme losses, making them unsuitable for real-world execution.
3. Lack of risk-adjusted learning: Financial traders prioritize strategies with favorable risk-reward ratios, rather than pure return maximization.

The Mean-Variance Framework in Bandits

To incorporate risk into decision-making, risk-aware bandits adopt the mean-variance framework, which considers:

• Expected reward (mean) – The average return of an action.
• Risk (variance) – The uncertainty or fluctuation in returns over time.

By optimizing both reward and variance, risk-aware bandits ensure that actions selected over time maintain stable performance rather than extreme, volatile outcomes. This shift is particularly useful in algorithmic trading, where risk management is just as critical as profit generation.

Smart Order Routing (SOR) as a Bandit Problem

Understanding Smart Order Routing (SOR)

Smart Order Routing (SOR) is a fundamental mechanism in electronic trading that determines where and how to execute orders across multiple venues. Given that different exchanges, dark pools, and alternative trading systems (ATS) have varying liquidity conditions, fees, and market impact, SOR aims to optimize execution by:

1. Minimizing transaction costs – Routing orders to venues with the best bid-ask spreads.
2. Reducing market impact – Avoiding large orders that might move the price against the trader.
3. Maximizing execution speed and probability – Ensuring that orders get filled quickly at the best price.

SOR decisions must be made sequentially and adaptively, making it a natural fit for bandit-based optimization. However, classical bandit approaches treat execution venues as independent actions, failing to capture the correlations between trading venues, order types, and market conditions. This limitation has led to the development of risk-aware linear bandits, which introduce a structured approach to decision-making in SOR.

Challenges in Applying Standard Bandits to SOR

• Censored feedback: Not all execution results are observable, especially in dark pools where information is limited.
• High-dimensional action space: The number of possible order-routing strategies grows exponentially as more venues are included.
• Adversarial market conditions: Prices, liquidity, and trading behavior change dynamically, requiring continuous adaptation.

How Linear Bandits Improve SOR Decisions

To overcome these challenges, linear bandits model rewards as a function of market features, allowing for generalization across actions. Instead of treating each venue independently, linear bandits assume that similar venues share structural relationships, enabling more efficient learning.

For example, if one exchange has high liquidity and low slippage, a linear bandit can infer that a similar exchange might also offer favorable execution conditions—reducing the need for exhaustive exploration. This structured learning approach dramatically improves the efficiency of order routing strategies.

Key Takeaways

• Traditional MABs optimize rewards but do not account for risk, making them unsuitable for finance.
• Risk-aware bandits use the mean-variance framework to balance return maximization and uncertainty reduction.
• SOR is a natural bandit problem, but requires structured learning due to market complexity.
• Linear bandits help by modeling relationships across venues, improving decision efficiency in order routing.

Challenges in Risk-Aware Financial Decision-Making

Integrating risk-aware learning into financial decision-making introduces several challenges that go beyond the typical exploration-exploitation tradeoff in standard multi-armed bandits (MABs). Traditional models focus on maximizing expected returns, but financial markets require a structured approach to managing risk, handling large action spaces, and adapting to changing market conditions.

This section explores key obstacles in applying risk-aware bandits to smart order routing (SOR) and algorithmic trading, emphasizing the impact of uncertainty, large-scale decision spaces, and real-world execution constraints.

Risk and Uncertainty in Trading Strategies

Market dynamics are inherently uncertain and adversarial, requiring decision-making models that account for both expected returns and risk factors. Traditional MABs assume stationary rewards, meaning the expected outcome of an action does not change over time. However, in live trading environments, execution quality varies based on:

• Market volatility – Fluctuations in price and liquidity impact execution risk.
• Hidden liquidity – Order book imbalances and dark pool activity can alter expected returns.
• Order flow toxicity – Institutional traders need to avoid executing against informed market participants.

Since trading strategies must minimize downside risk, risk-aware bandits optimize for both the mean (expected profit) and variance (uncertainty in execution quality). This ensures that algorithms prioritize stable, low-risk actions rather than purely maximizing short-term gains.

Large and Complex Action Spaces

Another major challenge in financial decision-making is the scale and complexity of the action space. In SOR and trade execution, a trader must choose from a vast number of possible order-routing strategies, with each decision affecting overall performance.

Why Large Action Spaces Are a Problem

• Exponential growth in routing options – The number of ways to split orders across multiple exchanges increases rapidly.
• Sparse feedback – Not all decisions provide clear reward signals, especially in dark pools where execution details are limited.
• Computational constraints – Testing every possible routing strategy is infeasible, requiring efficient exploration techniques.

Example: Order Routing Across 10 Venues

Suppose an algorithm must decide how to allocate 100% of a trade across 10 different exchanges.

• If orders can be split in 1% increments, there are 10^100 possible configurations—far too many to explore exhaustively.
• Market conditions are constantly evolving, meaning past execution results may not be a reliable predictor of future performance.

How Risk-Aware Linear Bandits Address This

Linear bandits model reward functions as a combination of market features, rather than treating each venue separately. This allows:

• Generalization across venues – Instead of learning from individual trades, the model learns patterns in market conditions that apply across multiple exchanges.
• Faster convergence – By leveraging feature-based representations, the algorithm requires fewer observations to make accurate decisions.
• Reduced exploration cost – Instead of blindly testing every action, the model exploits structural similarities between trading venues.

The Need for Structured Learning Approaches

To handle risk and large decision spaces effectively, modern trading algorithms require structured learning methods that balance reward optimization with risk management.

Three Key Requirements for Financial Bandit Models

1. Adaptive Learning – Algorithms must adjust to market changes in real time, rather than relying on fixed historical patterns.
2. Feature-Based Decision Making – Instead of treating each exchange independently, models should generalize across similar market conditions.
3. Regret Minimization with Risk Awareness – Traditional regret minimization focuses on maximizing expected reward, but financial applications require controlling volatility and worst-case losses.

How Risk-Aware Linear Bandits Meet These Requirements

• Structured Learning: Uses linear representations to manage large action spaces efficiently.
• Risk Control: Incorporates variance estimation to prioritize stable execution strategies.
• Efficient Exploration: Reduces unnecessary risk exposure by exploiting known market structure relationships.

Key Takeaways

• Financial markets are highly uncertain, requiring models that balance expected returns with risk management.
• Order execution and routing involve massive action spaces, making naive exploration impractical.
• Linear bandits provide a structured approach, allowing models to generalize across trading venues and adapt efficiently.

The Risk-Aware Bandit Framework: RISE and RISE++ Algorithms

The limitations of traditional multi-armed bandits (MABs) in financial applications—such as lack of risk awareness, large decision spaces, and market uncertainty—necessitate a more structured approach. To address these challenges, Ji, Xu, and Zhu introduce two risk-aware bandit algorithms:

1. Risk-Aware Explore-then-Commit (RISE) – A structured exploration method that balances risk and reward while maintaining computational efficiency.
2. Risk-Aware Successive Elimination (RISE++) – A refinement of RISE that improves learning efficiency through instance-dependent exploration.

Both algorithms minimize regret while controlling variance, making them highly effective for smart order routing (SOR) and other financial decision-making problems.

The Risk-Aware Explore-then-Commit (RISE) Algorithm

The RISE algorithm introduces a two-phase strategy to balance exploration (gathering information about different actions) and exploitation (selecting the best-known action) while accounting for mean-variance risk considerations.

How RISE Works

RISE follows an Explore-then-Commit (EtC) structure:

1. Exploration Phase

   • The algorithm actively tests different actions (e.g., different order-routing strategies) to estimate expected returns and risk levels.
   • It uses G-optimal design, a statistical method that ensures exploration is efficient and unbiased, reducing unnecessary trial-and-error.

2. Exploitation Phase

   • Once enough data is collected, the algorithm commits to the best-performing strategy based on a risk-adjusted reward function.
   • The decision rule incorporates both mean and variance, ensuring that the chosen strategy has stable performance, not just high returns.

Key Advantages of RISE

• Minimizes risk-aware regret – Unlike traditional bandits that only optimize returns, RISE ensures low variance in outcomes, crucial for institutional trading strategies.
• Instance-independent regret bound – Guarantees strong theoretical performance regardless of market conditions.
• Computational efficiency – The structured explore-then-commit approach reduces the number of actions needed for learning.

Limitations of RISE

• Not adaptive – Once the algorithm enters the exploitation phase, it stops learning, meaning it cannot adjust to changing market conditions.
• Exploration cost – The initial exploration phase can be costly if market conditions shift rapidly.

These limitations are addressed by the RISE++ algorithm, which introduces an adaptive learning mechanism.

The Risk-Aware Successive Elimination (RISE++) Algorithm

To improve on RISE, the RISE++ algorithm introduces an adaptive selection process that refines decision-making over time, ensuring that the model continuously learns from market conditions.

How RISE++ Works

1. Successive Elimination Strategy

   • Instead of a fixed exploration-exploitation split, RISE++ dynamically eliminates suboptimal actions over time.
   • This ensures that low-performing order routing strategies are discarded as soon as enough data is gathered, reducing unnecessary risk exposure.

2. Instance-Dependent Regret Bound

   • Unlike RISE, which has a fixed regret bound, RISE++ achieves faster convergence in favorable market conditions.
   • This means that if one trading venue consistently outperforms others, RISE++ adapts more quickly than RISE.

Key Advantages of RISE++

• Faster adaptation to market changes – The algorithm continuously refines its decision-making, making it more suitable for dynamic trading environments.
• Lower exploration cost – By eliminating bad strategies early, RISE++ requires fewer trades to converge to an optimal strategy.
• Better performance in stable conditions – When certain trading venues consistently offer better execution quality, RISE++ identifies them faster than traditional bandits.

When to Use RISE vs. RISE++

Comparison with Traditional MAB Algorithms

How RISE and RISE++ Differ from Standard Bandits

Why RISE and RISE++ Are Better for Finance

• Traditional UCB and Thompson Sampling do not account for risk, making them unsuitable for financial decision-making.
• RISE and RISE++ optimize both returns and variance, ensuring that trading strategies remain profitable and stable.
• Successive elimination in RISE++ reduces unnecessary exploration costs, making it more computationally efficient than traditional approaches.

Key Takeaways

• RISE is a structured explore-then-commit algorithm that ensures risk-aware decision-making but lacks adaptability.
• RISE++ improves upon RISE by eliminating weak strategies over time, leading to faster adaptation in volatile markets.
• Both algorithms outperform standard bandit methods in financial applications by incorporating mean-variance optimization and structured exploration techniques.

Application of Risk-Aware Linear Bandits in Smart Order Routing (SOR)

The RISE and RISE++ algorithms were designed to address real-world challenges in financial decision-making, particularly in Smart Order Routing (SOR). This section explores how these algorithms apply to order execution across multiple trading venues, highlighting key concepts such as liquidity fragmentation, execution risk, and market adaptation.

To validate their effectiveness, the authors of Risk-Aware Linear Bandits: Theory and Applications in Smart Order Routing (Ji, Xu, and Zhu) tested RISE and RISE++ using both synthetic simulations and real-world NASDAQ ITCH data. Their findings show that risk-aware linear bandits significantly improve execution quality, outperforming traditional bandit-based approaches.

The SOR Problem: A Linear Bandit Formulation

What is Smart Order Routing?

Smart Order Routing (SOR) is a process used in electronic trading to determine how to distribute an order across multiple exchanges and trading venues. Given that different platforms offer varying liquidity conditions, SOR aims to:

1. Minimize transaction costs – By routing orders to venues with the best bid-ask spreads.
2. Avoid price impact – By splitting large trades to prevent market movements.
3. Maximize execution probability – Ensuring orders are filled quickly and efficiently.

Why Traditional SOR Methods Are Limited

Most existing SOR algorithms use static rules or simple reinforcement learning techniques that fail to adapt to changing market conditions. Traditional approaches struggle with:

• High-dimensional action spaces – The number of possible routing strategies grows exponentially.
• Execution uncertainty – Market conditions fluctuate, making historical data unreliable.
• Adverse selection risk – Poorly executed orders can result in worse-than-expected trade outcomes.

How Risk-Aware Linear Bandits Improve SOR

The linear bandit framework models execution quality as a function of market features (e.g., order book depth, price impact, historical fill rates). Unlike traditional bandits that treat each venue separately, linear bandits generalize across similar trading environments, allowing faster learning and better order execution.

Evaluating RISE and RISE++ with Simulations

To test the performance of RISE and RISE++ in SOR, the authors conducted synthetic experiments where orders were routed under simulated market conditions.

Simulation Setup

The experiment assumed a market environment with:

• Multiple trading venues (exchanges, dark pools, and alternative trading systems).
• Different liquidity profiles, where execution costs varied across venues.
• Stochastic price movements, reflecting real-world market behavior.

Performance Metrics

To evaluate execution quality, the study compared:

• Execution cost – The difference between expected and actual trade prices.
• Variance in execution – How stable the results were across multiple trades.
• Regret minimization – How quickly the algorithm identified optimal routing strategies.

Key Findings

• RISE outperformed traditional bandit algorithms by optimizing both reward (execution price) and variance (consistency of execution quality).
• RISE++ adapted faster than RISE in highly volatile conditions, proving its advantage in dynamic markets.
• Traditional methods (UCB, Thompson Sampling) failed to account for risk, leading to higher execution costs and unstable performance.

These results confirmed that risk-aware linear bandits are better suited for real-world order routing problems than standard reinforcement learning techniques.

Real-World Testing: NASDAQ ITCH Dataset

Beyond simulations, RISE and RISE++ were tested using real historical trading data from the NASDAQ ITCH dataset—a widely used benchmark for market microstructure analysis.

What is the NASDAQ ITCH Dataset?

• A granular-level trading dataset containing every market order, trade execution, and liquidity change in NASDAQ-listed stocks.
• Provides realistic order flow patterns, making it ideal for testing algorithmic trading models.

Testing Methodology

The authors used historical ITCH data to simulate SOR decisions in a realistic trading environment.

• Feature extraction – Order book depth, trade volume, execution latency, and fill rates were used as input features.
• Comparison against real execution outcomes – The models’ decisions were evaluated based on actual market conditions.
• Risk-adjusted performance analysis – Execution stability was measured alongside cost reduction.

Key Findings from Real-World Data

• RISE and RISE++ successfully modeled real-world liquidity dynamics, outperforming rule-based and naive bandit approaches.
• Risk-aware learning reduced execution variance, making trade outcomes more predictable.
• RISE++ dynamically adapted to shifting liquidity conditions, leading to lower regret in volatile market environments.

These results validate the practical viability of risk-aware bandits for institutional trading strategies, demonstrating their ability to reduce execution risk while improving cost efficiency.

Key Takeaways

• SOR is an ideal use case for risk-aware bandits, as execution quality depends on balancing cost, risk, and liquidity conditions.
• Synthetic simulations confirm that RISE and RISE++ outperform traditional bandit methods in minimizing execution costs and uncertainty.
• Real-world NASDAQ ITCH testing shows that these algorithms effectively adapt to actual market conditions, proving their value for institutional trading.

Practical Implications for Algorithmic Trading

The real-world validation of RISE and RISE++ using simulated and NASDAQ ITCH data confirms their potential for smart order routing (SOR) and algorithmic trading. However, applying these models in live trading environments introduces additional practical challenges, such as integration with existing infrastructure, computational constraints, and regulatory considerations.

This section explores the implementation of risk-aware bandits in trading systems, their benefits and limitations, and potential future research directions.

Implementing Risk-Aware Bandits in Trading Systems

To integrate RISE and RISE++ into real-world trading systems, firms must consider several technical and operational factors.

Data Requirements and Feature Engineering

Risk-aware linear bandits rely on structured market data to make informed decisions. Successful implementation requires:

• Real-time order book data – Depth of book, bid-ask spreads, and liquidity snapshots.
• Historical execution data – Fill rates, price slippage, and past routing decisions.
• Market microstructure features – Trading volume, latency, and order flow toxicity indicators.

Challenge: Unlike academic simulations, real trading environments involve noisy and incomplete data, requiring robust preprocessing and feature selection to ensure the model remains effective.

Infrastructure and Latency Considerations

In high-frequency trading (HFT) and algorithmic execution, latency is critical.

• Decision-making speed – Routing decisions must be executed within microseconds to remain competitive.
• Low-latency data processing – Market signals must be updated in real time without bottlenecks.
• Efficient exploration strategies – Excessive exploration can lead to delays in execution.

Challenge: While RISE and RISE++ improve risk-adjusted returns, they introduce computational overhead compared to traditional rule-based SOR strategies. Optimizing performance for low-latency trading requires further engineering.

Integration with Execution Management Systems (EMS)

Most institutional traders use Execution Management Systems (EMS) to automate order routing.

• Plugging into EMS platforms – RISE and RISE++ can be implemented as decision-making layers within existing routing frameworks.
• Combining rule-based and ML-driven routing – Hybrid approaches can provide better risk-adjusted performance.
• Customization for different asset classes – SOR strategies differ for stocks, forex, and crypto, requiring algorithmic fine-tuning.

Challenge: Integrating risk-aware bandits into EMS platforms requires regulatory compliance and risk monitoring mechanisms to prevent unintended outcomes.

Future Directions in Risk-Aware Financial Learning

While RISE and RISE++ show promising results, their application in live trading presents several open research challenges and areas for further development.

Expanding Beyond Mean-Variance Risk Measures

The current risk-aware bandit framework relies on mean-variance optimization, but alternative risk measures could further improve decision-making:

• Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR) – Focuses on worst-case losses, useful for large institutional orders.
• Drawdown-based risk models – Minimizes consecutive losses, aligning better with hedge fund risk management strategies.
• Liquidity-adjusted risk measures – Incorporates market depth and order flow dynamics.

Contextual and Adaptive Bandits

• Contextual bandits could incorporate macro-market indicators, news sentiment, and institutional order flow data.
• Adaptive learning strategies could allow continuous model updates, ensuring optimal performance in changing market conditions.

Multi-Agent and Adversarial Learning

• Multi-agent models could optimize SOR for multiple traders executing simultaneously, reducing market impact.
• Adversarial learning could improve robustness against market manipulation and predatory trading strategies.

Key Takeaways

• RISE and RISE++ offer practical improvements for SOR, but require careful implementation to handle latency, data quality, and integration challenges.
• Further research into alternative risk measures, adaptive learning, and multi-agent systems could enhance real-world performance.
• Regulatory and operational factors must be considered when deploying machine learning models in institutional trading environments.

Conclusion

This article explored risk-aware linear bandits as a powerful tool for algorithmic trading and smart order routing.

• Traditional bandit models fail to account for risk, making them unsuitable for financial applications.
• RISE and RISE++ balance return optimization with risk minimization, providing more stable execution outcomes.
• Real-world tests using NASDAQ ITCH data confirm their effectiveness, but further refinements are needed for full-scale institutional adoption.

As machine learning continues to shape the future of quantitative finance, risk-aware algorithms will play a critical role in optimizing execution strategies, portfolio allocation, and high-frequency trading decisions. Future research in adaptive learning, adversarial modeling, and alternative risk metrics could further enhance their application in global financial markets.

About Axon Trade

Axon Trade provides advanced trading infrastructure for institutional and professional traders, offering high-performance FIX API connectivity, real-time market data, and smart order execution solutions. With a focus on low-latency trading and risk-aware decision-making, Axon Trade enables seamless access to multiple digital asset exchanges through a unified API.

Explore Axon Trade’s solutions:

• FIX API for Trading
• Real-Time Normalized Market Data

Contact Us for more info.