FFA Working Papers 6:004 (2026)254

Reinforcement Learning for Perpetual Futures Market Making

Martin Cekal
Department of Banking and Insurance, University of Economics

This paper studies market making in BTC and ETH perpetual futures with a simple event-driven reinforcement learning setup. PPO chooses quote skew and quote width, while the environment tracks execution gains and inventory losses separately. A temporary reduction of the adverse-fill penalty makes early training more stable. Across simulated and historical data, PPO quotes more selectively, carries smaller inventory, and usually ends with better portfolio value than a zero-action baseline. BTC is tighter than ETH, so the same control logic requires market-specific calibration, yet the qualitative
policy behavior remains consistent across both markets. The results are therefore encouraging in a narrow sense: a compact and interpretable RL policy can improve inventory control and overall portfolio outcomes in two different crypto perpetual environments, even though robust profitability claims remain out of scope.

Keywords: reinforcement learning, market making

Received: June 15, 2026; Revised: June 15, 2026; Accepted: July 14, 2026; Prepublished online: July 14, 2026; Published online: January 22, 2026  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Cekal, M. (2026). Reinforcement Learning for Perpetual Futures Market Making. FFA Working Papers, 6, Article 2026.004. https://doi.org/10.XXXX/xxx.2026.003
Download citation

References

  1. Thomas Ho and Hans R. Stoll. Optimal dealer pricing under transactions and return uncertainty. Journal of Financial Economics, 9(1):47-73, 1981. Go to original source...
  2. Maureen O'Hara. Market Microstructure Theory. Blackwell, 1995.
  3. Marco Avellaneda and Sasha Stoikov. Highfrequency trading in a limit order book. Quantitative Finance, 8(3):217-224, 2008. Go to original source...
  4. Richard S. Sutton and Andrew G. Barto. Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction. MIT Press, second edition, 2018.
  5. Yuriy Nevmyvaka, Yi Feng, and Michael Kearns. Reinforcement learning for optimized trade execution. In Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Machine Learning, pages 673-680, 2006. Go to original source...
  6. John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Radford, and Oleg Klimov. Proximal policy optimization algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017.
  7. Alvaro Cartea, Sebastian Jaimungal, and Jose Penalva. Algorithmic and High-Frequency Trading. Cambridge University Press, 2015.
  8. Thomas Spooner, John Fearnley, Rahul Savani, and Andreas Koukorinis. Market making via reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems, pages 434-442, 2018. Go to original source...
  9. Olivier Guéant and Iuliia Manziuk. Deep reinforcement learning for market making in corporate bonds: Beating the curse of dimensionality. Applied Mathematical Finance, 26(5):387-452, 2019. Go to original source...
  10. Thomas Spooner and Rahul Savani. Robust market making via adversarial reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the Twenty-Ninth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 4541-4547, 2020. Go to original source...
  11. Bruno Gasperov and Zvonko Kostanjcar. Market making with signals through deep reinforcement learning. IEEE Access, 9:61611-61622, 2021. Go to original source...
  12. Bruno Gasperov and Zvonko Kostanjcar. Deep reinforcement learning for market making under a Hawkes process-based limit order book model. IEEE Control Systems Letters, 6:2480-2485, 2022. Go to original source...
  13. Abbas Haider, Glenn I. Hawe, Hui Wang, and Bryan Scotney. Multi-asset market making via multi-task deep reinforcement learning. In Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery in Databases. Research Track, pages 418-433. Springer, 2022. Go to original source...