We investigate the effects of market making on market performance, focusing on allocative efficiency as well as gains from trade accrued by background traders. We employ empirical simulation-based methods to evaluate heuristic strategies for market makers as well as background investors in a variety of complex trading environments. Our market model incorporates private and common valuation elements, with dynamic fundamental value and asymmetric information. In this context, we compare the surplus achieved by background traders in strategic equilibrium, with and without a market maker. Our findings indicate that the presence of the market maker strongly tends to increase total welfare across various environments. Market-maker profit may or may not exceed the welfare gain, thus the effect on background-investor surplus is ambiguous. We find that market making tends to benefit investors in relatively thin markets, and situations where background traders are impatient, due to limited trading opportunities. The presence of additional market makers increases these benefits, as competition drives the market makers to provide liquidity at lower price spreads. A thorough sensitivity analysis indicates that these results are robust to reasonable changes in model parameters.

We present an agent-based model of manipulating prices in financial markets through spoofing: submitting spurious orders to mislead other traders. Built around the standard limit-order mechanism, our model captures a complex market environment with combined private and common values, the latter represented by noisy observations of a fundamental time series. We start with zero intelligence traders, who ignore the order book, and introduce a version of heuristic belief learning (HBL) strategy that exploits the order book to predict price outcomes. By employing an empirical game-theoretic analysis to derive approximate strategic equilibria, we demonstrate the effectiveness of HBL and the usefulness of order book information in a range of non-spoofing environments. We further show that a market with HBL traders is spoofable, in that a spoofer can qualitatively manipulate prices towards its desired direction. After re-equilibrating games with spoofing, we find spoofing generally hurts market surplus and decreases the proportion of HBL. However, HBL's persistence in most environments with spoofing indicates a consistently spoofable market. Our model provides a way to quantify the effect of spoofing on trading behavior and efficiency, and thus measures the profitability and cost of an important form of market manipulation.