Economics & Trading Essay Competition
Write an original, evidence-based essay on a topic in economics or financial markets. Two divisions, one rubric, and a path to publication.
Students write an original, evidence-based essay responding to one of five prompts. Two divisions run in parallel: High School and University. Both are judged against a shared rubric, with expectations calibrated to level. The strongest essays in each division are eligible for publication through FTA Research.
How it works.
750–1,500 words, excluding citations and title.
Choose one prompt per submission. Multiple submissions are allowed if you want to answer more than one prompt; each must be submitted separately.
Any consistent style is acceptable. All sources must be cited.
High School and University, judged separately on the same rubric.
Submitted through the FTA Research submission form on this site.
December 1, 2026.
Choose one. Make the case.
Five prompts. Pick one per submission. No prompt carries extra weight; choose the one you can argue best.
Anatomy of a Deal
Select one real IPO, merger, or bond offering completed within the past three years. Walk through how the deal was structured, why that financing approach was chosen, how the underwriting bank priced and distributed the offering, and what economic conditions shaped the deal's timing and structure.
How a Market Maker Actually Makes Money
Explain mechanically how a market-making firm profits from the bid-ask spread and what risks (inventory risk, adverse selection) it takes on. Choose a real period of unusually high volatility and analyze how that risk exposure would have shifted.
Tariffs: Protection or Self-Sabotage?
Evaluate, using economic reasoning rather than political rhetoric, whether tariffs actually protect the country imposing them or whether the costs usually outweigh the benefits.
Is College Still Worth It?
Using real data and economic reasoning, evaluate whether a four-year degree remains a good financial investment today, and identify who that answer changes for.
When Markets Lose Their Minds
Choose one historical bubble or crash and analyze it through a specific behavioral finance concept (loss aversion, herd behavior, overconfidence). Evaluate whether better regulation or education could have prevented it.
A 100-point rubric, judged blind.
Every essay is scored against the same five categories. Expectations are calibrated to each division, but the rubric does not change.
| Category | Exemplary | Proficient | Developing | Beginning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Economic Reasoning & Analysis | Exemplary · 22–25 Argument is built on sound economic logic. Mechanisms are clearly explained, trade-offs and assumptions are explicit, and the reasoning holds under scrutiny. | Proficient · 18–21 Core economic reasoning is correct and mostly complete. Key mechanisms are identified, with minor gaps in nuance or assumption-handling. | Developing · 14–17 Some valid reasoning but uneven. Mechanisms are partial, and assumptions are left implicit or unexamined. | Beginning · 0–13 Reasoning is superficial, anecdotal, or absent. Economic mechanisms are misstated or missing. |
Writing Quality & Structure | Exemplary · 22–25 Clear thesis, logical sequencing, and precise, economical prose. Free of mechanical errors. | Proficient · 18–21 Clear thesis and structure. Prose is generally clean; minor errors do not impede reading. | Developing · 14–17 Thesis is vague or structure is loose. Prose is uneven, and errors occasionally obscure meaning. | Beginning · 0–13 No discernible thesis. Disorganized, with frequent errors that impede reading. |
Originality & Independent Thinking | Exemplary · 22–25 Takes a genuine, defensible position, engages counterarguments, and shows independent judgment rather than received opinion. | Proficient · 18–21 Position is clear and mostly original. Acknowledges counterpoints, with some reliance on conventional framing. | Developing · 14–17 Restates common arguments. Limited engagement with counterpoints and little independent synthesis. | Beginning · 0–13 No real position. Repeats source material without synthesis and ignores opposing views. |
Use of Evidence & Real-World Application | Exemplary · 13–15 Evidence is relevant, specific, and well-integrated. Real-world examples are accurate and load-bearing. Sources are credible and cited. | Proficient · 10–12 Evidence supports the argument with relevant examples. Sources are generally credible and cited. | Developing · 7–9 Evidence is thin, generic, or loosely connected. Examples are illustrative but not load-bearing; citation is incomplete. | Beginning · 0–6 Little or no evidence. Examples are absent or inaccurate; sources are missing or uncited. |
Adherence to Prompt & Format | Exemplary · 9–10 Directly answers the chosen prompt, stays within 750–1,500 words, and follows formatting and citation requirements. | Proficient · 7–8 Addresses the prompt and stays within or near the word range, with minor format or citation deviations. | Developing · 5–6 Partially addresses the prompt, falls outside the word range, with several format or citation issues. | Beginning · 0–4 Off-prompt or substantially outside the word range. Format and citation requirements are not met. |
Deadline: December 1, 2026.
Essays are submitted through the FTA Research submission form. Have your essay ready before you start.