Markets with Heterogeneous Agents: Dynamics and Survival of Bayesian vs. No-Regret Learners
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
We analyze the performance of heterogeneous learning agents in asset markets with stochastic payoffs. Our main focus is on comparing Bayesian learners and no-regret learners who compete in markets and identifying the conditions under which each approach is more effective. We formally relate the notions of survival and market dominance studied in economics and the framework of regret minimization, thereby bridging these theories. A central finding is that regret plays a key role in market selection, but low regret alone does not guarantee survival: surprisingly, an agent may achieve even logarithmic regret and yet be driven out of the market when competing against a Bayesian learner with a finite prior that assigns positive probability to the correct model. At the same time, we show that Bayesian learning is highly fragile, while no-regret learning requires less knowledge of the environment and is therefore more robust. Motivated by this contrast, we propose two simple hybrid strategies that incorporate Bayesian updates while improving robustness and adaptability to distribution shifts, taking a step toward a best-of-both-worlds learning approach. More broadly, our work contributes to the understanding of dynamics of heterogeneous learning agents and their impact on markets.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 33 of its 89 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Feb 2025.
Builds on
33 of 89 references.
References · 33
- 2019Introduction to Online Convex Optimizationcited by 803
- 2019Introduction to Multi-Armed Banditscited by 481
- 2017Selling to a No-Regret Buyercited by 43
- 2022The Sample Complexity of Online Contract Designcited by 35
- 2022Strategizing against Learners in Bayesian Gamescited by 34
- 2021Bilateral Trade: A Regret Minimization Perspectivecited by 29
- 2015Learning in Auctions: Regret is Hard, Envy is Easycited by 23
- 2024Contracting with a Learning Agentcited by 23
- 2021Auctions Between Regret-Minimizing Agentscited by 22
- 2023Autobidders with Budget and ROI Constraints: Efficiency, Regret, and Pacing Dynamicscited by 20
- 2021A Regret Analysis of Bilateral Tradecited by 19
- 2023Selling to Multiple No-Regret Buyerscited by 19
21 more
- 2021How and Why to Manipulate Your Own Agent: On the Incentives of Users of Learning Agentscited by 17
- 2024Pareto-Optimal Algorithms for Learning in Gamescited by 16
- 2020Convergence Analysis of No-Regret Bidding Algorithms in Repeated Auctionscited by 14
- 2024Regulation of Algorithmic Collusioncited by 10
- 2021Nash Convergence of Mean-Based Learning Algorithms in First-Price Auctionscited by 8
- 2025Regulation of Algorithmic Collusion, Refined: Testing Pessimistic Calibrated Regretcited by 8
- 2022No-Regret Learning in Partially-Informed Auctionscited by 7
- 2024Algorithmic Collusion Without Threatscited by 7
- 2022Liquid Welfare Guarantees for No-Regret Learning in Sequential Budgeted Auctionscited by 5
- 2020Optimal Collaterals in Multi-Enterprise Investment Networkscited by 4
- 2024Repeated Contracting with Multiple Non-Myopic Agents: Policy Regret and Limited Liabilitycited by 4
- 2018Dynamics of Distributed Updating in Fisher Marketscited by 3
- 2023Strategic Budget Selection in a Competitive Autobidding Worldcited by 3
- 2023On the Convergence of Learning Algorithms in Bayesian Auction Gamescited by 3
- 2024Games with Payments between Learning Agentscited by 3
- 2024Learning to Play Against Unknown Opponentscited by 3
- 2024Learning in Budgeted Auctions with Spacing Objectivescited by 2
- 2018Universal Growth in Production Economiescited by 1
- 2018Amortized Analysis of Asynchronous Price Dynamicscited by 1
- 2019Proportional Dynamics in Exchange Economiescited by 1
- 2024Randomized Truthful Auctions with Learning Agentscited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.