Jun

15

  During WW1, in 1917, the price of wheat went to a record $3.25 a bushel. Using an online CPI calculator(courtesy of the Bureau of Labor Statistics), that price in today's dollars would be $60.24. A far cry from the $5 and change wheat is trading today. Grains in general have had a long term decrease in price over the past couple hundred years. We owe this price decrease to improvements in technology. After all, in 1917 a farmer was lucky to get 14 bushels of wheat an acre while today a farmer can anticipate a yield of over 55 bushels per acre….and the cost of production in both time and labor has decreased substantially. One wonders what the yields will be like in another 100 years.

Brendan Turner writes: 

Gro Intelligence put out some interesting data points on fertilizer and pesticide use in the US.

From them:

"Sixty five years ago, harvested area of corn sat around 77 million acres, and average US corn yield was just 54 bushels per acre. Presently, corn acreage is at 82.7 million acres, and yield now sits at a median of over 170 bushels per acre. In the 1940s, soybean harvested area was at just 10.7 million acres. Today, there are around 89.5 million acres harvested, representing an increase of 736 percent. Soybean yield was less than 20 bushels per acre in the 1940s, but now averages 49 bushels per acre."

From me:

While the growth in US grain and oilseed production is no doubt impressive, the rise of other agricultural players in South America and the Black Sea have had the largest influence on keeping a lid on prices thanks to their explosive production.

Back home in Saskatchewan, every year, our family farms about 15,000 acres of pulse crops like lentils, peas, and chickpeas. The varieties for these crops were mainly developed by university and CDN government partnerships and the large majority of the harvest of these pulses have been shipped to India or the Middle East. However, for the last decade or so, these varieties have been exported to places like Kazakhstan and Russia and now, the Black Sea is replacing Canada as the staple exporter of pulses to these markets.

Simple equation: Lower costs of production by new players –> lower selling price points –> downtrend shift in margin for major producers –> potentially fewer acres planted by major producers (assuming demand isn't increasing proportionately to supply)

Of course, this thesis gets thrown out the window when there is a drought in a major producing country (or any commodity). However, In a drought situation, for markets like pulses where there is no futures market, speculation is a bit more suppressed. By this, I mean less volatility and thus, decreased opportunities to capture value within volatile markets like you might w/ corn or soybeans or wheat.

Stefan Jovanovich writes: 

$3.25 in 1917 is equal to today using the gold currency unit of account As the Watsurf notes, the BLS with its CPI calculation estimates today's nominal dollar price as 18.53 times the record 1917 price for wheat. If you use the 1917 dollar price as the gold currency unit of account (gold adjusted for the change in official price in 1933 and the changes in the open market price of the metal and the relative prices of the dollar against other major currencies since 1973), the change is even more dramatic. $3.25 becomes $133.90 - a multiple increase of 41.12. As always, the BLS CPI calculations fall far short of the actual price collapses of currencies against physical commodities.

For an average acre of land suitable for wheat growing the total yield in 1917 was $45.50 in gold currency units of account (gcus). At that time Kansas wheat acreage sold for roughly $200 (gcus). Today the same acreage produced produces a total yield of $6.67 (gcus) and sells for $50.87 gcus ($2100 in current nominal dollars).

So, based on P/Es measured in gcus, the prices for Kansas wheat acreage were a seeming bargain in 1917 (less than 5 times gross yield).

The difficulty is that P/Es do not seem to be very useful as predictors of what comes next. Kansas wheat land prices peaked at slightly less than $300 in gcus in the 1921; nearly a century later they are selling for less than 20% of that price using the same unit of account.

I defer to our expert and others for any speculations about what may happen to Kansas wheat land prices over the next century. The current P/E is - once again - a relative bargain: 7.6 times gross yield. 

Jun

15

Last night at dinner a former floor trader and very successful hedge fund guy told me, "The only news you want to trade on is the news you make up yourself".

Jeff Watson writes: 

My mentor taught me to look at the big news, and then look at the market reaction. And if the reaction is different than what one would expect from the news, then this in itself is a very important "tell" about the market. Even the reaction to every day little news is worth watching. In my case I watch things like country movement, exports, and yields. The market reaction in many cases is more important for trading than the actual "news" (at least in my time frame).

Doug Martin writes: 

That's the whole, "Bad News Good Action" concept. News and reaction, is most of the time too complex for me to analyze. I'm never correct in my analysis on that front and typically will look at the news only after observing/trading the move.

The only "tell" I can derive from news, is how FAST the effected market moves. Much of what I do revolves around observing/measuring the speed in which a market moves to tell me how significant traders interpret the event or non event.

For instance, yesterday the speed in which Euro and Aud moved was significant in the time frames I trade.

Jun

13

Like Stefan, I too dropped out of economics 101.

My marketing professor gave numerous examples of how he, as an advertising guy had increased prices of quite a few items and that cause an increase in sales. His point was it was about perception.

Somewhere during the first week of my economics class I was shown a curve that proved my advertising professor was wrong… As price goes down demand goes up. I argued with the professor that curve wasn't reality. He showed me reality… The door

Years later Jack Kemp summed it up best one day when we were talking, during his campaign in the middle of Iowa, about economics and he said just substitute the word incentive for the word economics and you'll understand it a whole lot better.

I have learned the more people talk about economics the more confusing it becomes, yet, it is easier to understand than understanding women is for me.

anonymous writes: 

One of the simplifying assumptions often made in basic economics is perfect information. That of course differs from reality. The basic curve assumes such perfect knowledge and that the product is the same regardless of the price. But with some items, like cosmetics, the price itself becomes a proxy for the assumed quality of the product. So a price increase leads enough consumers to believe they are buying a higher quality product, increasing sales. In essence in those cases the assumed product across different price ranges is no longer the same product in the eyes of the consumer.

Jun

13

 Why are we at war with Canada? According to the Trump Administration, there's a net trade surplus between US and Canada (goods and services):

"The U.S. goods trade deficit with Canada was $17.5 billion in 2017, a 59.7% increase ($6.5 billion) over 2016."

"The United States has a services trade surplus of an estimated $26 billion with Canada in 2017, up 8.0% from 2016."

Stefan Jovanovich writes: 

1. Cars and Auto Parts.

Canada manufactures 4 million cars. It buys 3 million and exports 1 million to the United States. It is also the largest auto parts exporter to the United States.

2. Marketing Boards

Canada uses the agricultural marketing board mechanism for controlling production and prices of domestic dairy and other "grocery" farm products. To support this mechanism the marketing boards restrict all imports by tariff and by quota while allowing Canadian "surplus" production to be exported at foreign market prices.

Question: Who would profit most from the shift of car and auto parts production to the United States? Whose domestic production of "grocery" farm products would be boosted by the exclusion of "surplus" Canadian production?

Answer: Agricultural and car and auto parts producers in the Great Lakes States of the Mid-West

Ain't the study of actual political economic events much more interesting than further refinement of marginal utility theory?

Geoge Zachar writes: 

The reports I've seen indicate Canadian dairy protectionism is driven by Quebec…something the the anglophone provinces deeply resent, as they're forced to pay up for dairy products.

So, in addition to being seen supporting important US constituencies, Trump is deepening political divisions north of the border.

Stefan Jovanovich writes: 

The Canadian Parliament decided to "stand with Canadian workers" when President Trump announced the steel and aluminum tariffs.

I doubt very much that they have examined their own history with regard to trade "wars". If they had, they might have been tempted to take President Trump at his word about the need for "reciprocity".

In the Elgin-Marcy Treaty, signed in 1854, the U.S. and London entered into a free trade agreement. As the Wikipedia article notes, the Canadian business interests threatened to ask the U.S. for annexation if Britain did not work to open the U.S. markets to Canadian exports. Under the Treaty timber and wheat and coal were admitted to the U.S. without duties or quotas; the existing 21% tariff was eliminated by the U.S. The reward for the Americans was open navigation on the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence and access to the Grand banks fisheries. The arrangement was broadly popular and hailed as the Canadian-American Reciprocity Treaty.

Within 4 years the Canadians decided that they needed to protect their manufacturers. The Cayley tariff of 1858 and the Galt tariff of 1859 raised the duties on imported manufactured goods 20 per cent. For the new Republican Party, this was an absolute Godsend. In 1860, as now, the United States had the lowest tariffs and least restrictive trade rules of any country. Why, Congressman Morrill asked, should American producers have to accept foreign competition but be shut out of foreign markets? Morrill shifted the discussion on tariffs from being a question about protecting Northeastern manufacturers to one for the nation as a whole. He introduced his bill by announcing this change: "In adjusting the details of a tariff, I would treat agriculture, manufactures, mining, and commerce, as I would our whole people—as members of one family, all entitled to equal favor, and no one to be made the beast of burden to carry the packs of others." The "free trade" Democrats did not have an answer.

By 1861 the U.S. had increased overall tariffs from 17% to 26%; by the end of the Civil War the average rate had increased to 38%. It was to stay there until the Underwood tariff (the Revenue Act of 1913).

Jun

10

 I have read the book Scale by Geoffrey West and I find many of the charts tautological and suffer from the part whole fallacy. I wonder how many of the scaling relations are predictive and not related to the physical dimensions of weight and height of the many species he approximates with algorithmic charts that are consistent with random numbers.

Leandro Toriano writes: 

West's stuff is poorly regarded among technical people–it pops, but power laws can be made to look like they fit too many things. (There are a few critiques on arXiv, iirc.)

Recently I came across Indra's Pearls by David Mumford, Caroline Series, and David Wright. They do hat-tip Mandelbrot's Hausdorff (fractal) dimension, but don't fall into trendy theory. Easily makes my top 100 of all time, and probably top 3 mathematics books for non-mathematicians. In it you'll find more reasonable discussions of this stuff than elsewhere.

Koebe 1/4 on youtube has a good video of Curt MacMullen speaking on Renormalisation.

Jun

10

 "Dust rising - Salton Sea's toxic dust to get worse and worse"

Bo Keely writes: 

Bill, u forget how intelligent u are. u hit it on the head a year ago in Slabs saying the alkaline air makes the climate here almost intolerable. it isn't the heat, nor the Salton Sea, but the alkaline soil that is absorbed into the air creating a 'coal-miner lung' effect. i can feel the sapping effect of alkaline dust on my skin and lung lining walking any day over 100F. at that temp the air is also rarefied to provide less pressure making it more difficult to breath like being at altitude. i can walk anywhere else in the world at that temp w/out a problem, but not here at 120' below sea level where the air is alkaline.

last weekend it was only 105F but i walked too long following century-old brass survey markers and the remains of the surveyor's camps into the Chocolate Mt. gunnery range and ran out of water and got discombobulated. i sat on my hat during a rest stop to keep off the hot ground and forgot it. that left me walking hatless six more waterless hours into the sun and i suffered for it. finally, i could walk no more, not a step to save my life, and collapsed in the scanty shade of a Palo Verde for two hours til after sunset to recover. the problem was that after the sun went down i couldn't see where i had parked the motorcycle, which meant more hiking but by then my tongue had shrunk from it's previous dry swelling that nearly blocked the oral passage. you'll be able to hear of similar exploits in Texas Ranger 'Big Foot Wallace'.

Jun

7

From hamsters to dogs to elephants to whales, the number of heartbeats per lifetime is nearly the same, namely about 1.5 billion

— Geoffrey West, Los Alamos National Laboratory, and the Santa Fe Institute

Zubin Al Genubi writes: 

This sound a bit too deterministic. While genetic disposition is a large factor, conditioning, good diet, exercise, lifestyle must play a substantial part. Moderation must help. 

Russ Sears writes: 

While I cannot give the source because it been 35 years since I read it. This heart beat speculation was part of why doctors up until recently did not recommend running for health benefits. If g-d had designed us that way, why should we even test it with statistics.

It's only been since 80s women ran a marathon in the Olympic because of these types of simple reasoning.

The statistics speak volumes about the benefits of cardio exercise especially running. However that benefit declines the more you train and it's not surprising that one could design a study which shows overtraining can lower life expectancy. As I've aged the difference between training and over training has become much harder to draw a line… hence I suspect many of the negative life expectancies are from older endurance athletes over training.

And I suspect these shocking to unsuspecting readers are in much more demand too produce due to click-baiting of journalists than real science.

Also many of theses studies one can use a simple test if they are legitimately looking at the issues. If the study is look at average age at death or actually deaths to expected. Average age of death is heavily influenced by the start of running boom and early outlier deaths. It will take many more year before averaging age is valid In other words most serious endurance athletes are still living so their positive effects not seen in average age at death. Opposite of survival effect in stock market historical studies.

Jun

5

 "A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines." -Ralph Waldo Emerson

From his "Essay on Self Reliance" (At 10,000 words, this essay is worth a read. (It measures at a 7.4-grade level on the Flesch-Kincaid method in Word. I struggle to get below 12 in my writing.)

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function." -F. Scott Fitzgerald

Whenever I turn to an analysis of China, I ultimately realize that I also need to consider India. This duality causes me difficulty and the two quotes above indicate that I require a mental prosthetic.

Therefore, I created a new word by inserting "di" into China. The result - ChIndia.

Would other mental prosthetics for dichotomies be useful in investing? For example, buy and hold vs. buy low, sell high.

May

31

 Did Kurzweil upload his brain and forget the password??!

I recently drilled down on a lot of his work and speeches.

He basically only ever says four or five things, for the entire past 1-2 decades.

Here are the top ten things Kurzzzweil needs to never say ever again, in his entire life.

1. "I am so smart, I made all these brilliant predictions."

2. "I may not have invented the Web. But I predicted it. And I did it back when no one else did or could. Only I was so smart. (See below.)"

3. "Everything increases exponentially in tech and only I was able to perceive this. My critics could not which is why they were so wrong and I was so right, so often. (See # 1.)"

4. "I invented a device that reads books to the blind. (Did I mention how smart I am and how much smarter I am then everyone else? Mainly because I understand the power of exponential growth in anything tech, and nobody else did, especially my critics who were horribly wrong while I was so brilliantly right.)"

5."Nanobots will eventually circulate inside our bodies, correcting all our ills."

6. "One day brain implants will allow us to extend our frontal cortex into the cloud allowing us to upload our brains, and we will be so much smarter. Especially me. I will still be smarter than everyone else."

7. "Did I mention I went to M.I.T., a few dozen times in this speech alone?"

8. "Nanobots."

9. "Exponential growth is awesome."

10. "…and it's usually why I am so right and my critics were always so wrong, and why I am so much smarter than them."

What an insufferable bore.

He is mostly and mainly a self marketing machine masquerading as an intellect. But the sad thing is, people fall for it. It works. Google fell for it.

I think some people here have, too.

Sad!

May

24

Apologies if I have asked this one before. Mr Jovanovich's post reminded me of B.S., about whom I've a longstanding puzzle.

Why don't Case-Shiller indices see more volume?

There is exactly one market-maker for all of the Case-Shiller indices. He lives at 123 Maple St in Greenwich and has decades of bank experience. To me there are natural shorts (everybody with a mortgage in Indianapolis should short Indianapolis) and natural longs (everybody without a mortgage in Indianapolis should long 1/20th Indianapolis). For hot coastal markets there are even more natural longs.

And yet they see such low volume. B.S. is quite famous, and so are his indices. (Major US newspapers cite them.) What gives?

May

20

We use the 72 hour rule: family, friends and fish should never be together for more than 72 hours at a time.

May

9

I'm sure you have read articles like this, but I found it hard to believe at first. Buy the close and sell the open since 1993 returns just under 600%. The reverse flat.

anonymous writes:

Along comes an article BUY THE CLOSE SELL THE OPEN. Since 1993 with 5280 observations the average move at the open is 0.2 that's 20 points on 1000 base, i.e, 0.02 % it's unchanged from open to close. 

Alston Mabry writes: 

SPY, for the last 250 trading days:

mean Close-Open:  +0.17
sd Close-Open:   0.9839755

mean Open-Close:  -0.06
sd Open-Close:   1.88

anonymous writes: 

transaction costs….
 

May

8

Betting odds on the 2pm decision by the pres?

Kim Zussman writes: 

My bet is something other than complete abandonment. Trump has an upcoming heroic / legacy accomplishment possible with Kim, and won't want to give an example of US abrogating prior treaties.

Zubin Al Genubi writes:

Even if you knew ahead of time what the news will be, there is a theory that says it wouldn't help you trade what the market does.

Larry Williams writes: 

Fully agree based on 565 years of looking at news and the markets.

Other than, if news is supposed to be bullish and prices sell off there is trouble ahead and vice versa.

Apr

28

Here are monthly rankings in S&P 500 points 2006 to 2017. Two summer months in bottom quartile, but one summer month near the top. The best month to avoid last 12 years is Jan.

Apr

21

Quoting Anatoly Veltman:

DB 90% off its record doesn't scare me. I'd buy that before any lottery ticket in the world. But back to EUR/CHF's first touch of 1.2000 since SNB had refused to prop that Maginot line January 2015–this is a market significant event.

about CHF: (I have been wrong before – more often than right.) But I think the SNB wants a weaker franc (e.g =eurchf goes up). So they will love the eurchf up here–the same on all the other CHF-crosses.

The break in 2015 was a failure of their intervention.

On the other hand, there is the chair's round number phenomena. I don't know how to play this.


about DB: The DeutscheBank chart is scary to me, because:

- I think investors can not value the bank.
- by now other EU countries have more successfully managed their failing banks (like Italy)
- I think some sort of strategy of betting for time is going on in Germany
- this strategy seems to fail, because the stock does not participate in the recovery in EuroLand or the world.
- some might bet on a bailout
- there is a strong anti-capitalistic sentiment in Germany and any bailout will trigger one more annoying socialist debate – hence the betting on time (by the government)

The chart attached is the ratio DB(in USD) vs SP500 financials (via XLF).

Apr

20

 The chair wrote about the movie "The Death of Stalin".

I watched it the first time, as a comedy, and did not like it. I found it is not funny. I watched it a second time as a drama/documentary–and now it is an excellent movie to me.

Another book about Russia, that recently impressed me a lot is Former People: The Final Days of the Russian Aristocracy by Douglas Smith.I don't know if this book was introduced to the site before.

The background about Lenin resonated the most with me. An entitled aristocrat started out to better the world and killed millions in the process.I think this happened multiple times in history.

From google-books:

Former People - Epic in scope, precise in detail, and heart-breaking in its human drama, Former People is the first book to recount the history of the aristocracy caught up in the maelstrom of the Bolshevik Revolution and the creation of Stalin's Russia. Filled with chilling tales of looted palaces and burning estates, of desperate flights in the night from marauding peasants and Red Army soldiers, of imprisonment, exile, and execution, it is the story of how a centuries'-old elite, famous for its glittering wealth, its service to the Tsar and Empire, and its promotion of the arts and culture, was dispossessed and destroyed along with the rest of old Russia

Apr

18

 Chart of USPS annual mail volume from the USPS website.

Carder Dimitroff writes: 

I'm wondering if it makes sense to sell US Postal System assets. 

anonymous comments: 

There are basically three different theories on what to do with the post office.

Theory 1: The post office is dying. The solution lies in free markets which means privatizing it which may or may not mean ultimately the sale of many of its assets and properties.

Theory 2: Yes first class mail is dying, but package delivery is increasing. We can't privatize the post office because nobody will ever be able to put together this package of assets/distribution again. The post office just needs to re-purpose it's assets the way it has already started to do and get into same day package delivery. This of course is supported by the postal union and its political allies.

Theory 3: (This was once the position of the postal union, and is now relegated to weird, out of touch leftists): The postal union is an American institution that connects us all into a society. Yes, you don't know anybody who hangs out at the post office, but believe me, if we close a lot of post offices it will devastate small communities where people hang out at the post office. Again, you don't know anybody who hangs out at the post office, but millions of people do.

It's an interesting debate between theories 1 and 2, but unfortunately the debate is always mixed up with a bunch of people lobbing Theory 3 stuff into the conversation.

anonymous adds: 

New Zealand's experience: "history of new zealand post".

Apr

11

In the last few days one of the economic talking heads commented on how he has "not seen volatility like this since" sometime in the past. I forget whether the former time was 1998 or 2008, but it doesn't matter, as there are many periods in the past with greater volatility.

My quick look at past volatility consists solely of looking at the height and duration of VIX in earlier periods. I took the standard measure (VIX) because of its relatively universal acceptance. I could use some of my own measures, but not without the risk of being flamed for subjectivity, despite the fact that they compare with VIX on a relative basis.

Question: Is there something I am missing? Is there some measure of vol that I am unaware of? Could the high volatility simply refer to the gentleman's equity balance? Could this simply be an effort to gain a headline, i.e. fake news? Any thoughts?

Gibbons Burke writes: 

The VIX seems skewed to being more sensitive to downside volatility and not so much to upside volatility, and it is based on one instrument: the S&P 500 index calls and puts and their ability to speak to the volatility of the underlying index.

The standard Historical volatility calculation of the same underlying instrument used as the input for option pricing models is somewhat more flexible in that it can be applied to any instrument since all it requires is daily closing prices, and the S&P 500 retroactively before the VIX was created.

The two measures, VIX and SPX historical volatility correlate closely—and most interesting is when they depart from that correlation, which shows that the options market is anticipating something which has not shown up in the movement of the underlying. You know all this of course, and have developed some very interesting work on options and their open interest already as it relates to the underlying, no?

In technical analysis realms, average range, and Wells Wilder's Average True Range (which considers the previous day's close as part of the day's range if it is above or below the high or low of the day, which captures post-close volatility and gap moves) has been used as a volatility measure for input into risk allocation components in trading systems, and as breakout bands for trading systems like one made famous by Larry Williams and others like Steve Notis.

A newer volatility measure which came out of chaos theory ideas when they became popular measures the total range (or true range) over some n-period window of previous market activity, and measures the sum of all the individual period ranges (or true ranges) as a ratio. Two instances of this volatility measure are Adam White's VHF index (vertical-horizontal f-something) and CTA Ed Dreiss' Choppiness Index. Both are solid conceptually, easy to calculate, and are already implemented in many systems.

anonymous writes: 

For the S&P, here is the mean daily High-Low range as a % of the Open, for each year since 1962:

year  /  mean daily H-L as % of Open

2018 -  1.44%
2017 -  0.51%
2016 -  0.95%
2015 -  1.10%
2014 -  0.86%
2013 -  0.85%
2012 -  1.06%
2011 -  1.62%
2010 -  1.36%
2009 -  2.00%
2008 -  2.74%
2007 -  1.17%
2006 -  0.85%
2005 -  0.88%
2004 -  0.95%
2003 -  1.41%
2002 -  2.08%
2001 -  1.75%
2000 -  1.84%
1999 -  1.54%
1998 -  1.58%
1997 -  1.42%
1996 -  1.01%
1995 -  0.72%
1994 -  0.82%
1993 -  0.71%
1992 -  0.82%
1991 -  1.11%
1990 -  1.31%
1989 -  0.95%
1988 -  1.22%
1987 -  1.77%
1986 -  1.12%
1985 -  0.79%
1984 -  1.00%
1983 -  1.01%
1982 -  1.60%
1981 -  2.03%
1980 -  2.21%
1979 -  1.55%
1978 -  1.60%
1977 -  1.37%
1976 -  1.60%
1975 -  2.16%
1974 -  2.58%
1973 -  2.06%
1972 -  1.53%
1971 -  1.54%
1970 -  2.09%
1969 -  1.74%
1968 -  1.78%
1967 -  1.62%
1966 -  1.77%
1965 -  1.26%
1964 -  1.16%
1963 -  1.26%
1962 -  1.73%

Sushil Kedia writes:

​VIX measures the price of volatility all are wagering on. Price is the weighted mean/vector sum of all individual values of volatility the various have for themselves. 
Combining a few well accepted ideas, here & everywhere else: 
Depending on where one is in the market food chain there are different versions of what is noise and what is tradeable information content. 
So a simple and effective & consistent to calculate the value of volatility for oneself is to objectively write down what is the minimum movement size below which you dont act. For a HFT robot it could be every tick & for "markets cannot be timed behemoths collecting only other people's money, a.k.a. long only passive funds" it could be 5%. Whatever it be define your sensitivity and lets call it your sensitivity unit move. 
Then each occurence of a move of a unit size is counted — as in counting by toes or a computer programme over any observed length of data. Count the absolute vaues of the Unit sensitivity. Divide the net change over the same length of data with the sum of absolute values of unit sensitivities observed. 
A straight line move would thus give you zero volatility or noise and a perfectly tradeable information content. If however over the observed length of data, on the other hand, net change is zero then there is only noise. 
I remember, many years ago Bill & few others had discussed here how Point & Figure method from the university of mumbo jumbo is an approach that is very similar to this thinking and a fantastic way to separate signal and noise relevant to each as per their forebearance within the food chain. 

Apr

11

The other day, I wrote/postulated the equation:

MTM Impact of Long Ins - MTM impact of short Ins = = - (Opportunity Impact of Outs + Opportunity Impact of Virgins)

(details here)

Transposing this symbology:

<=> MTM Impact of Long Ins + (Opportunity Impact of Outs + Opportunity Impact of Virgins) = MTM impact of short Ins

Interesting perspective comes by:

Given that the present moment monetary value of gains and losses made by long and shorts must be equal in value, the insertion of Opportunity cost (which has infinite degrees of freedom for value of time) in this equation is more a logical symbolism than any arithmetical thing (which is only derivable by focusing on the present moment).

If markets are falling & the shorts are gaining, it is not only the suffering of the existing longs but a much larger mass of the Virgins is stacked in along with the Outs to fight with the Longs in their war with the shorts!

If markets are rising however, the self fulfilling prophecy of trend-following works much more given financial markets follow the economics of giffen goods (ownership is the utility, there is no physical use of the financial asset).

In simpler language what it implies to this back-bencher in the class of counting is that its not tough to visualize a mirrored convexity working in the markets. The present moment, defined in terms of change in prices, is where the Outs and Virgins appear to have the minima. But either which ways the price changes, the Outs and the Virgins are on the side of the longs!

The short seller is the loneliest animal in the food chain of the market wilds (you can see him here). He is not lonely only in the long run due to the drift, but at each change of the tick!

Apr

11

We are at a point where MA 50 day is crossing down the 100 MA…

Sure, we are in a low, and maybe we will see a bounce to retest higher values, but the point is, use this rebound to lighten up, thanking God for giving us new highs from which to sell, or are you really aiming for new highs ?

What should push the markets to new highs in your point of view? Better express it now than later…

Adam Grimes writes: 

Is there any statistical edge to the 50 day MA crossing the 100 day? This is something that is easily testable, and if you have tested it and found no edge (beyond the baseline drift, of course)… then the only reason to be talking about it now is that we must be convinced "this time is different" and it matters this time, right?

If so, why?

Unless there are good answer to those questions, isn't all discussion of moving average crosses just noise?

Apr

6

Nice interview with Dimson:

Episode #100: Elroy Dimson, "High Valuations Don't Necessarily Mean That We're Going To See Asset Prices Collapse"

Apr

3

So hobbling down on all fours motivated by the waves and the counts that I am used to looking at from the old university of mumbo jumbo.

Wondering what the erudite quants are seeing at this hour….

A cane it out moment? At some points surely all religions are unanimous. Is this that moment?

Mar

21

 I've been doing a lot of back country skiing and ski mountaineering these past few years. Each day the avalanche forecasters put out an advisory with colors: green for low, yellow for moderate, red for high. This is kind of like the DS calendar in a way. But when you get into the field there are several different areas of focus for decision making a route finding. There are the big mountains, their aspect and shape. Typically we climb up a ridge because nothing can fall down on you as you are at the high point of the local terrain. But within the bigger picture there is what mountaineers call micro terrain. Even on a safe day, a small cliff can kill you or cause severe injury. People fall into tree wells and die. We always look for the safe route up and down. Always look for an exit strategy, a 'zone of safety'. We nibble into big terrain bit by bit, never committing all the way. We test, both the big picture, and the little using techniques such as avalanche pits to test snow, ski pole pokes, ski cuts. Always gathering information during the day, ready to pull back if the micro terrain does not look good. We are always ready to, and often do, turn around.

I've been pondering this for years in markets. Even in a bull market, a micro down draft can cause havoc with a trade. Within an up day, there are down legs. These, both in markets, and in skiing are some of the hardest to see, understand and get a handle on and can be the difference between a great day and some severe problems.

The main key is to survive. Make every trip a round trip. Returning home is not optional.

Mar

19

 Apophenia has come to represent the human bias and tendency to seek patterns in random information. Our brains crave patterns and to make sense out of things. It’s looking at a random cloud and remarking how it resembles a duck with a bill. It’s the man in the moon, the Jesus toast, etc.

Luke’s “randomania”, on the other hand, is the flip side of the coin. It is the tendency to attribute chance probability or randomness to what is actually patterned data. It is the bias of thinking there is nothing to be seen or discovered, when there really is. It’s rather rare to catch ourselves doing this, because once we think that something is just “noise” we tend to ignore it and walk on by, never to return.

anonymous writes: 

An interesting thing about markets is at one level of focus one has noise, but in the same time period, in a higher level of granularity, there are regularities.

In an apparent anomaly, the physical laws may be different at sub atomic levels, than at larger levels. 

Mar

17

This IBD article proves how easy it is to manipulate the press with hyperbole and misdirection.

"Theranos Founder Known as Next Steve Jobs' Pays $500,000 to Settle 'Massive Fraud Charges'"

"The next Steve Jobs"

Uh huh.

One should be less biblical in their retorts when another person questions the next tech craze or the sanity of capital pouring into an idea that is too good to be true on the surface, and transparency issues around data make it impossible to reach a solid conclusion.

I find this one especially close to another big name in the tech space whose promises continue to under deliver… yet his moonshot ideas allow him to burn through other peoples money…

Thanks, CNBC.

Henry Gifford writes: 

I don't think Theranos is a scam.

As soon as I heard about the company's plans to sell blood tests that are much less expensive, and easier to do, and maybe better in other ways, I thought about all the companies that would be hurt by them, and how heavily regulated those companies are, and how hard those companies will fight back, presumably using regulations as part of their defense.

Then I looked and saw the founder has three strikes against her: she's female, she's good looking, she's young. This shouldn't make any difference, but when combined with being an industry outsider, the jealousy factor can be expected to go up, and the ease with which entrenched companies can create doubt and negative publicity is I think greatly increased.

An early battle the company lost was when the regulators declared that the small container they collect blood samples in is a "medical device," and therefore subject to all sorts of regulations, thus they are not allowed to use it. Sure smells to me like regulators looking for something to start a fight about – how many years could the regulators cut off the company's cash flow while they consider the regulatory merits of a small plastic container which will not contact the body? I didn't hear anything about blood collection containers having previously been regulated, so this is extra perfect – it will take a few years to write the regulations….

When the gloves came off and the regulators cut the company down to being allowed to sell one test only – for herpes – I thought that was perfect – the company from Stanford and Palo Alto with the young founder is now associated with a sexually transmitted disease, but barred from testing for glucose, etc.

Looking at the recent press gives me many reasons to be skeptical that the recent reports of fraud are accurate, or have any merit at all.

One article entitled something like "Patients get different test results with Theranos vs. hospital labs" quoted one patient as claiming a potassium test was about 11.3 with Theranos and 9.6 (or so, as far as I remember) with a hospital lab (implied as being the gold standard). Nothing about what they normal variation is, which I understand is significant, or what period of time elapsed between tests, or what the results might have been with 10 or 100 tests done with each technology. The other patient quoted said she got a glucose reading of 103 in a hospital, and 96 (or 99?) from Theranos. Glucose levels in blood can be expected to change by at least that much after a patent walks across a parking lot, even if every test was going to give the same result every time. No article I saw had any other "bad" numbers quoted, but they still made this sound horrible.

The actions of the regulators were described in one article as "State and federal authorities started investigations into the accuracy of the company's blood testing work. In 2016 the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which oversees blood testing labs in the U.S., banned Holmes from operating a lab and revoked Theranos' blood testing licence." The first sentence describes the beginning of the process, and the second sentence described the end of the process. There was no mention of anything in the middle – did they find anything? If so, what did they find? Was the suspension of the blood testing license related to anything they found other than non-compliance with the declaration that the sample container was a medical device that should be regulated? If they found anything wrong, why was this not mentioned in this article or any other I've seen?

The company, in their defense, claimed to have offered to demonstrate the machine in the offices of The Wall Street Journal, and provided or offered to provide thousands of test results and etc. evidence that their technology worked, but reportedly got no response.

Most recent articles quoted several people as not having been able to find out anything about how their new machine works. Neither journalists at The Wall Street Journal nor anyplace else could find out anything, or find anyone who knew anything. This is consistent with the box the company came up with being a hollow cardboard box, or some other fraud. But, I know how to find out what is inside the box, and what is inside the company's labs. With a quick search I found about 190 patents assigned to Theranos, all for technologies related to what they claim they are doing. I know a thing or two about patents, and a couple of years ago I read some of the patents assigned to Theranos, including some whose inventor was the company founder (there are many of those). The patents are complex but I think mostly well written – this I think says a lot in a field where I think most patents are so poorly written they are worthless. Theranos hired an expensive law firm that specializes in bio patents – a good sign. The US Patent and Trademark Office makes about as many mistakes as any other large organization, but probably not more, and is not quick to grant patents that do not meet the standards, including not being anticipated by prior art – someone else's idea that came first. Getting patents means they probably came up with something. The patents are mostly different enough from each other to not be minor variations on the same theme. Getting about 190 patents, a huge number, means they are apparently working hard and really coming up with things. Many things, probably very valuable. But, most importantly, anyone who works in bio or writes regularly about bio and claims they have no idea what Theranos is doing, and has no way of finding out what Theranos is doing, is not making any mistake – they are lying. They are surely lying because bio is a field that is very dependent on patents. All the articles I've read are consistent with 100% of the people quoted knowing the company has many patents in their core area, but playing dumb and lying by claiming to have no idea what is going on. The existence of the patents means that if they are good patents, which I expect they are, Theranos really has a lock on much better blood tests for years to come. I think it is quite possible that Theranos came up with much, much better blood tests, so much better that they could dominate the field for decades to come (as old patents expire then-current and evolving technologies are covered by newer patents). All evidence I have seen points to this being possible, and not unlikely. If this is the case, then the real story is as follows:

Young dropout comes up with much better blood testing methods, gets strong patents, raises money and actually brings the technology to market fairly quickly – patents, company, and sales, the unusual dream come true, actually done at lightning speed in an industry where patents are almost expired when products come to market (drugs, frequently). Founder stacks the board with powerful people that are not industry insiders, to help defend against the inevitable attacks from the entrenched competitors. Regulators and competitors in one of the most regulated industries can't find any real problem, so they invent a technicality related to exactly what makes the company special – the small collection container. Then they allow the company to test only for a sexually transmitted disease. Fill in the details after this.

Then they find the founder guilty of fraud – but no news reports explain the nature of the fraud, or mention any law or regulation that was broken. Perhaps the fraud was using the small sample container without approval before the approval was required?

I don't know the real story, but none of the stores I've read ring true.

I suspect the real fraud is what the regulators have done, and what the competitors continue to sell while better technologies exist.

anonymous writes: 

I always love a good contrarian position, so thanks for posting yours. Here is what I don't get:

She wasn't doing this on a shoestring budget. She has hundreds of millions.

If the thing works, couldn't she just show the world?

If the thing works, wouldn't Walgreens be out there saying "no wait, this thing works everybody, we of course tested it before we entered into an agreement with Theranos"?

David Lillienfeld writes: 

I'll go beyond that: Not everyone in the valley was pushing to get into the company. There were many who weren't. That's in contrast to, say, 23andme a decade ago or Gilead a couple of decades ago.

The first BoD was stocked with major names in American politics–with absolutely little if any healthcare expertise. Maybe that makes sense to some, it doesn't to me. George Schultz may have been a great SecState, but I fail to see the value add for healthcare. Maybe because it's simply not there. It's not always a matter of hearing the right answer as even knowing what are the right questions to ask.

As for shoestring budget, the office bldg. (I pass it every day) sits on a commanding bluff on Page Mill and Porter. It's hardly low-cost. The company may not have spent like drunken sailors, but low budget doesn't seem to have been its thing either. Not Brooks Brothers, not Jos A Banks, maybe Paul Stuart. I guess the finance people could be grateful it wasn't Savile Row.

Now, let's look at the founder. She has little knowledge of the deeply regulated environment that is healthcare in the US. Rage against those regulations all you want, they define much of the marketplace. Her age means she hasn't lived through the inevitable crises in the healthcare world, for which knowledge of FDA, EMA, ECs, IRBs, etc is invaluable. Think it's an accident that there are very few young CEOs in the biotech world–start-ups or otherwise?

Think surgeons. Do you want the surgeon who just finished her training to do your Whipple procedure, or the chief of surgery? I'll take the latter, just as I'd prefer the former for my appendectomy. Theranos was a Whipple–high risk, big potential reward. Age wasn't in her favor. Enough said.

I'll leave aside the scientific basis for Theranos's products–it simply wasn't there.

As I put it to someone else on the list who asked me for an evaluation of Theranos a few years back when this person had been approached about making an investment in the company, if something looks too good to be true, it probably is.

Mar

17

 I have been back country skiing in British Columbia and Japan recently. Skiing in trees is a good strategy because there is less wind and the snow is soft. The trick is to find well spaced trees. A young friend commented that you don't ski "trees" you ski the spaces between the trees.

On the long hike up the hills I have lots of time to think about things like this. Applied to trading, the spaces would be the time between volatility events. Survivorship analysis gives some good info especially when we press into historical record territory as we did a bit ago. Another idea of spaces is the gaps that appear in overnight trading, or even things like the "Cohn" gap. I think trading abhors a vacuum and low volume areas like to be revisited.

Larry Williams writes:

And trees can be dangerous. My friend and excellent skier did not miss one.

His memory lives on with this trail. Also former Miami Dolphin great Doug Betters did the same thing and today lives in a wheelchair.

Never confuse boldness with recklessness.

Mar

14

 Re: Xi life-long chairman

I think this is a significant event.

The rule of law within China is in question more than before.

Because of this development, I expect the money-flows out of mainland china to continue or to accelerate.

People will publicly laud Xi, but will privately move money out.

The prime final receiver will be US assets (equities, bonds & real estate). Intermediate receivers are Australia, New Zealand, Mexico, some Europe and maybe Africa (re-branded as investment).

Since major private outflows are banned by the Chinese Gov.– creativity is applied.

I assume, some on this list have better knowledge about the tools applied. Maybe crypto currencies are used as an intermediate tool.

Some data, that supports above: The "outflows" of millionaires out of mainland China into the rest of the world.

Mar

11

I missed out on a couple good trades this week during a power outage/internet outage.

Now I am thinking redundancy at an affordable level. The way I trade does not demand intense computer power and latency. Just general connectivity works fine. Losing power/internet is not devastating to me either. It's just painful when I miss opportunities that proved successful.

Curious if anyone has any input or recommendations. Thanks.

Current set up with zero redundancy:

Primary Computer (Laptop) - Connected to Broadband Internet Access and general commercial power

No Secondary Computer

Remote Access to Computer - TeamViewer

Potential future set up:

Primary Computer (Laptop) - Connected to Broadband and commercial power with Battery Backup/Surge Protector

Secondary Computer (Laptop) - Connected to Broadband with Battery Backup/Surge Protector
- 4G Connection

Remote Access to Computer(s) - TeamViewer

Generator

Larry Williams writes: 

Cloud computer you can access via phone works here in Hurricane land.

Mar

8

 Dear Specs,

I am very late in writing about the Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. It was held in January and I attended to staff the booth for a few hours and go to two conferences: digital health and smart retail.

Will recount my experience bullet style; please contact me privately if you'd like more info.

- Nothing new in hardware
- Buzzwords were AI, Blockchain, and to a lesser extent robotics
- The "smart home" exhibit was HUGE. Many different players, still too fragmented and not yet plug and play.
- IoT is here but the margins are non existent for consumer
- The start-up area was wholly uninspiring
- Digital health will be dominated by big players: medical device companies, telecommunication companies, and insurance companies. They will buy out or simply push out anyone smaller.
- Smart retail is creepy; many cameras, geo-location indoors, brick and mortar is transforming into more of a display (and possibly Virtual Reality (VR)) play.

Places where there is good money to be made in the short term, for industrial, health, and consumer: augmented reality (part of VR).

Mar

8

Robots were going to strike terror into the hearts of all workers and devastate incomes and the economy. They were cited as a reason to sell stocks back in 2009-11 by our resident robot pundit, actually one of the best times ever to buy stocks.
Where they at, though?!

Did they go the way of "peak oil?"

Stefanie Harvey writes: 

One of the issues with robotics and automation is that designers frequently anthropomorphize their construction and use cases.

This is silly (with the exception of "companion" robots.)

Effective robotics enhance or extend human competency. Lift more, survive harsh environments, no need for down time.

The technology needs a bit of improvement but one driving factor is that human life is cheap. As we near 8 billion people we are the ultimate commodity; there is no cost driver for widespread adoption. Yet. 

Stefan Jovanovich writes: 

Stefanie is letting the mad Rover down easy. No one whose enterprise must do things better, faster and lower price has paid any attention to the Department of Labor statistics since public employees became unionized. No one who cares at all about people having better lives thinks "robots" (sic) threaten anything. If applying the labor theory of value really worked to produce wealth, ditches would be dug with teaspoons instead of mini-backhoes.

anonymous writes: 

Based on capital investment, it appears businesses are not even bothering to build the robots. Check out this tweet with chart from Adam Tooze:

"Historically, tighter labour markets in US drive wages and capital substitution —> higher investment. Since 2014 that pattern has uncoupled. @CapEconUS @SoberLook"

Feb

27

 We are in Ventura county, CA. As you have read, there were two major disasters in Ventura and Santa Barbara county beginning in Dec 2017. The Thomas fire in December, and the Montecito mudslides subsequent to a January downpour. Neither of these affected us directly, though we could see the fires clearly from our hill (the Mrs cried), and the mudslides destroyed the beautiful place we were married.

Since that downpour there has been no rain here, and it seems we're on track for one of the lowest rainfall seasons on record. This sounds horrible, but our drip irrigation is enough to keep the vines happy and create a good crop. You may also have read that 2017 was record high rainfall for many parts of California. Here it was about 50% over the average, and the vines showed it. Vigor was so high we wound up hedging the vines (with a lithium battery electric hedge trimmer), and dropping quite a bit of fruit to try to equalize ripening rates. Still, there was a large crop and I'm not sure what we're going to do with all the good wine we made.

Tonight's work on trellis repair is what led me to write this. A few years ago I read that Western Bluebirds were beneficial for vineyards because they are insectivores. In this area there is epidemic Pierces' disease - a bacterial grapevine infection that is always fatal, very contagious, and spread by the locally ubiquitous glassy-winged sharpshooter. We do try to control it by various means. I hung lacewing-egg cards in the vineyard 3 years ago because a lacewing instar is known to eat sharpshooter eggs. We also spray imidacloprid and use systemic granules. (A natural approach guy nearby lost his entire vineyard to PD two years ago. I am all in favor of organic/sustainable…..but this is war).

Back to Bluebirds. About 2 years ago I bought nesting boxes and mounted two at either end of the vineyard. The males are colorful and showy and the females are drab. The literature says the boxes should be a fair distance from each other because competing families will fight. Last year the box at the end of the Syrah block was never used, but the one at the end of Grenache hosted a nesting pair. Mom and pop were cute and I enjoyed them. When I was in the vineyard they both would sentinel on various nearby vine posts, and were alert but peaceful when I checked their nest. I'm not sure if they hung around because they were worried about me or if I scared up insects they could eat. I any case we got to know each other. I talk to them. "Get to work!' "Why aren't you hunting?". These birds went wild when there was a bloom of mayflies in various stages of dying. Protein paradise (I hope they see the sharpshooters but who knows).

This couple nested and produced young which I think fledged. Later in the summer I noticed the same or another pair again nesting in the same box. Only this time the babies were killed by the horrible heat of Aug/Sept 2017.

I cleaned the apartment and it is ready for new tenants.

Tonight there were at least 3 pairs of bluebirds flitting around and watching me. At first there appeared to be a particular male corresponding with a particular female, but I couldn't be sure. And it seemed early for nesting. But after a while there was a possible clue. Usually they fly and land in pairs - a male with his female. But tonight there wasn't as much pairing. In fact I saw two males perched on adjacent vine posts, chirping at me gregariously, for quite a long time. I also noticed that in spite of the sparse vegetation (and subsequent insect) growth, they were both pretty fat. How could this be, so early in the season, with record drought and slim insect pickings? Then I looked further and noticed both males were puffing their chest feathers to make themselves look bigger.

Shit! I did this same thing in high school.

So it looks like the pairings are still in process. I plan to still encourage them. And I plan to irrigate as much as it takes to make the vines grow, and hope this year's drought will still be kind to our little blue friends.

Feb

14

The current VIX is priced above both the first (F1) and second month Vix futures (F2). I looked at times  when Vix>F2 and the subsequent moves of SP500 holding until Vix<F2, since 2012, non-overlapping.


Nbr of trades             :  40
Total points              :   475.00
Avg points                :    11.88
Stdev                     :        26.92
Z                         :              2.79
Pct Win                   :        0.73
Max Trade P&L             :    81.00
Min Trade P&L             :   -81.25
Avg PL Win Trades         :    24.09
Avg PL Lose Trades        :   -20.32

The average length of the trade is 3 days.  The current trade was entered on 1/31, 9 days ago and down -160  points and not included above because it is still open.  After this long it is another 11 days on average before the term structure flips back to contango and this trade would be exited.

Feb

10

 “Inflation is About to Appear ‘With a Vengeance’ Paul Tudor Jones Says”

Larry Williams writes: 

I’d defer to Hoisington Capital over PTJ on inflation.

anonymous writes: 

Hoisington has an interesting comment about the low savings rate now vs the normal 8%. Ancedotally I’m seeing lots of consumer spending and travel due to the “bull market” euphoria.

Feb

3

 Markets can experience contagion. I remember from trading futures (nee commodities) that a crash in one market tended to bleed through to others. We would always remember it as though someone who had a great position in beans would sell it out to meet a margin call in silver that should have been dumped. That is, cutting your profits to let your losses run.

In that vein I wonder how much the recent hit in Bitcoin contributed to the equities decline.

Jim Lackey comments: 

Ben K Green Horse Trading.

Bitcoin the gypsy trade
Currency Rebel Commander 
Nazz Maniac Mule

Feb

1

"Are Longboat Key Cameras an Invasion of Privacy?"

A scary advance of the state surveillance apparatus. Don't let this fool you, these cameras are a printing press of revenue. Don't drive in this town if you ever even jaywalked, they will use anything as a pretext to detain you and search you and your car. There is a bright side, just think how safe you will be.

Jan

27

Not sure how to count it, but it sure seems that the remarkable magnitude of weekly gains in SPX are correlated with the number of slanderous articles about Trump in the gossip media (BBG, NYT, CNN).

One fears the day they cut him 1mm of slack, in their pink hats.

Jan

27

Dear Universe,

I have just posted my 2018 walking tour schedule on my website www.indepthwalkingtours.com.

Also, I am nearing completion of a memoir called BOND, SPOCK, GALT AND ME: GROWING UP NERD IN THE SIXTIES. Should be fun to read for those who remember those times.

See you on the streets!

Fred

Jan

19

For educational and history purposes 
Assuming DJIA closes where it is today on the coming tue
Here are the longest stretches of DJIA without 5% corrections from all time high closes  in terms of calendar days 

# rank by longest stretch since 1900 

Date first date of 5% correction 
DJIA value at the time of first 5% correction from all time high close 
Date , first date when DJIA came out from 5% correction zone ( i.e previous day DJIA close was below 5% from ATH close , while on this day its above (ATH close -5%)
# days , self explanatory 
returns self explanatory 

Jan

19

Peter Pinkhasov replies:

Mr. Partridge, I have just sold my Climax Motors”

Jan

13

 I sometimes wonder how big agrarian reformer traders like palindrome and drunk and upside down man and his twin can make money retrospectively outside of service loopholes and I think a large part of it is creating a buzz concerning their already held positions and another part of it is they made money in the past but haven't made as much as the market in the last x years? What do you think?

anonymous writes: 

Some time ago I corresponded with professor Malkiel about the WSJ dart-throwing contest. I pointed out that the pros had (slightly) beaten the darts. Dr Malkiel's response was that this was explained by the announcement effect: People reading the picks of experts (vs darts) bought the expert's picks at the next open - believing the experts were in fact experts. This publicity added to the the expert's returns. And controlling for this, there was no difference - like the thousand monkeys composition problem.

As far as upside down people and sages, in a world of lawyers surely it is malpractice not to advertise positively one's positions.

Peter Ringel writes: 

Two days ago the  center-most headline on drudge was:

"CHINA MAY HALT PURCHASES OF US TREASURIES –Markets Rattled" (It linked to articles on Bloomberg and cnbc.)

An emotional argument and IMHO not the real driver of the current leg down in bonds. Bonds made some sort of short-term low.

I thought: "Wyckoff Lives", because it seems to be Wyckoff-style news-manipulation.

Today, I read the first paper on Kora's list: Front Page News: The Effect of News Consumption on Financial Markets by A. Fedyk

and I think: "Wyckoff Lives!"

- The paper gives empiric to the fact, that front-page news on BBerg create higher volume and stronger drift in the minutes after the news-release – than non-front page news "of equal importance".

- The paper defines three categories of news PI("primary important"), SI_1("secondary important" on front page) and SI_2("secondary important" NOT on front page)

- The paper discusses the relation of SI_1 and SI_2

- The paper does not research the impact of PI-news - probably because we don't know what the control group (of news) would be .

I think it is an easy step to conclude that this behavior is gamed. E.g. if someone wants to exit a position, he will attempt to place news on BBerg's front-page, create a buzz and exit into that "artificial" volume.

The above describes a potential manipulation to exit a position and a resulting reversal (intraday).

Now I wonder if there are already papers that research news-buzz impact longer-term and for directional moves.

To research this I think a major problem is how to categorize and qualify the news and what would be the control group? E.g. for the "story stock Tesla" (the one with the buzz), what would be the "non-story Tesla"?

Stefan Jovanovich writes: 

The question about the last year's stock market rise is whether the gains are to be measured in dollars or Euros. In dollars it has been a big deal; in Euros it was an 8% net return, less than half what could have been earned without the stock market risk by simply being short the Almighty dollar and long the Euro. 

I agree FX impact & risk is often overlooked by the (global) public. We just had it in Poland, where a lot of private real estate debt was in USD. Then people were in trouble, because of the strong USD. The polish Gov ended up forcing the creditor to convert to zloties (the polish currency).

Jan

12

The UN provides a convenient table that ranks countries by you-know-what. Perhaps this was in the President's briefing book.

Jan

4

Many markets are in a parabolic upward move with new highs and current prices well above the 20 day average, i.e they're trending… is it bullish or bearish and what is the affect on other markets that have not gone up big?

anonymous writes: 

The move has been underway for several weeks, most recently with CL edging above 60 and GC breaking above 1308. In the midst of the NYC blizzard, the markets smell the long-forgotten florid boughs of the K-spring.

The rallies of the past decade were driven by geopolitical tensions, or fears of debt default in Europe. But the economic backdrop is qualitatively different now.

The question is whether the Fed can get ahead of it, or not, and it ends in a crack-up boom. Or, is it even a sustainable rally? It's difficult to get too confident with softs not joining in the fun.

Dec

30

 The lede: Bitcoin drops 11% as South Korea moves to regulate cryptocurrency trading

Instead of the more relevant (other crypto did not drop commensurately): "Bitcoin drops as Snapshot Block for the Segwit 2x Fork Passes"

Boris writes:

Still acting as directional magnet for all other cryptos, at least for the larger ones - Only Ripple not following.

Heck of a run for Ripple (XRP) in the last 24 hours - now the third largest (71B) crypto by market-cap. Was second largest for couple of hours. Going from 1.16 (yesterday noon) to currently 1.67 USD - Market chatter of becoming the winner of 2018. Great pattern behavior to capitalize on. Stay tuned.

anonymous writes:

I would note that XRP is not a cryptocurrency, and is the opposite of the vision of a trustless, decentralized peer-to-peer transaction network. The XRP token itself has little utility in the Ripple network, and is just a demo token for Ripple, Inc.'s Hyperledger tech. Even if banks choose to use XRP to defray costs of using the network, the amount of XRP required is trivial. Ripple leadership has said that it would amount to about USD 10 worth of XRP for an institution's entire year of network fees. The futile attempts to explain that to XRP "investors" could merit a scholarly article by the scholarly disciples of Leon Festinger. The Ripple tech does have value, and the best way to play it (i.e. lowest risk:reward ratio) is through equity investment in Ripple. Ripple, Inc. holds 65% of the outstanding Ripple tokens, and starting in January will unlock these tokens, distributing them on exchanges.

Of course, the pumps in XRP are astounding due to new dumb money that regards a USD 1.70 token as "cheap" (there are 100B XRP tokens total) compared to ETH at 750 (95M coins) or BTC at 14500 (16M coins). Because not driven by changes in fundamentals, the dumps are dramatic too.

Speculative profits are profits, and making money from the oblivious greed of others is just as good as any other profit; no question.

Andy Aiken writes: 

Life isn't like the golden days, when there was one phone company, the top marginal tax rate was 91%, stock brokerage commissions were hundreds of dollars per trade, and a heart attack or aneurysm had 95% mortality. Remember the placid days of yore, when people worked 6 days a week, 10 hours a day, and nonetheless spent 70% of disposable income on shelter and food? Those were good times, much better than letting people have money to fritter away on ringtones and vacation homes. When times were still good, people didn't die of fancy illnesses like Parkinsonism or Alzheimer's, they died of proper diseases like cholera and tuberculosis! Or they consumed a bit too much of the botulinum toxin that was omnipresent in the food supply. Sure, a few slipped through and died of things like ALS, but they were exceptions.

Dec

30

 Quick summary from Tyler Cowen: "The Rate of Return on Everything"

Here is what I learned from the paper itself:

1. Risky assets such as equities and residential real estate average about 7% gains per year in real terms. Housing outperformed equity before WWII, vice versa after WWII. In any case it is a puzzle that housing returns are less volatile but about at the same level as equity returns over a broader time span.

2. Equity and housing gains have a relatively low covariance. Buy both!

3. Equity returns across countries have become increasingly correlated, housing returns not.

4. The return on real safe assets is much more volatile than you might think.

5. The equity premium is volatile too.

6. The authors find support for Piketty's r > g, except near periods of war. Furthermore, the gap between r and g does not seem to be correlated with the growth rate of the economy.

I found this to be one of the best and most interesting papers of the year.

The NBER version says you can have it for free if you live in a "developing" country or are an establishment drone of various types, but in **big red letters** says that I can't have it, so here is the working paper version.

Federal Reserve Bank Of San Francisco Working Paper Series

The Rate of Return on Everything
, 1870–2015 "scar Jordà Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, University of California, Davis et al

December 2017 Working Paper 2017-25

This paper answers fundamental questions that have preoccupied modern economic thought since the 18th century. What is the aggregate real rate of return in the economy? Is it higher than the growth rate of the economy and, if so, by how much? Is there a tendency for returns to fall in the long-run? Which particular assets have the highest long-run returns? We answer these questions on the basis of a new and comprehensive dataset for all major asset classes, including—for the first time—total returns to the largest, but oft ignored, component of household wealth, housing. The annual data on total returns for equity, housing, bonds, and bills cover 16 advanced economies from 1870 to 2015, and our new evidence reveals many new insights and puzzles.

Dec

27

Bitcoin, from Anand

December 27, 2017 | 3 Comments

 The more I read about this market the more Bitcoin and its offshoots look like Railroad stocks in the late 1800s. Behind the shadows there are ‘whales’ who own large blocks with the credulous public chasing the market higher. Every time there is a mini panic these guys come in and support the market like a modern version of Jay Gould. For the time being they are seen as kind benefactors with some kind of wispy greater goals in mind (to save the market/solve global poverty/give humanity its freedom etc). I reckon they are pushing the market up together to liquidate their holdings on the gullible public. A couple of days ago LiteCoin founder said he’d liquidated his whole holdings as he didn’t want a conflict of interest. When it all crashes and the publics savings are wiped out there will be wailing and hand wringing but who are they going to complain to? After all, bitcoin buyers think the establishment is out to get them which is what drew them to go ‘off piste’ in the first place!

I don’t think many people are ‘trading’ bitcoin. We know the stress trading financial markets with a fraction of the volatility. Anyone who tries to trade these tokens is going to have a heart attack within a month. They are a mixture of ‘real money’ (money launderers/criminals gangs and rogue states like N Korea doing off the system transactions) and ‘long only investors’ most of whom are investment neophytes. The latter are the second coming of the silver brigade we saw a few years ago. In fact I think the Silver tin hat lunatics have migrated to Bitcoin and other tokens and picked up other followers along the way. Check the Silver price vs. Bitcoin movement (people have mentioned Gold but I think Silver is the one which is inversely correlated although I need to test it).

Andy Aiken writes:

The volatility is a profound boon to a trader, not inherently a nerve-wracking experience. It’s unclear what you think a trader actually does.

The concentration of ownership of BTC is not dissimilar to present-day ownership of US stocks or real estate.

As for the smear of an inherent criminality, this has been debunked here numerous times. It’s almost always the final argument of those who would prefer that humanity have no economic freedom at all.

Dec

15

 There has been much comparison between the BTC rally and the tulip bulb bubble back in the 1630's. Zero Edge has proclaimed the BTC "bubble" as the biggest bubble in history. Whether it is or not, none of that matters to me. What does matter is all the mention of tulips and the effect they had contributing to my family's considerable folklore.

Back in the late 1960's. my great aunt became rather batty, as most women on that side do. Since she was well off, people referred to her as an eccentric, rather than hanging the crazy moniker poor people would get. One day, my great uncle(by marriage) dug up a bunch of tulip bulbs and put them in their pantry's onion storage box. Apparently, he never told my aunt that he put them in the box. For the record, my aunt was arguably the worst cook in Illinois and it's lucky they never had kids as she would have probably poisoned them. My mom and dad jokingly called her refrigerator the ptomaine box and we were instructed as kids to always politely refuse her offers of food.

One day she was making him dinner and mistakenly used the tulip bulbs from the pantry instead of onions and shallots. That night, he ate the dish, got stomach cramps later in the evening, then dropped dead the next day. She said she didn't have any dinner because she wasn't feeling well. Because he was in his 80's, had chronic medical issues, and was an old man, no autopsy was ever performed, so we'll never know the exact truth of what killed him.

At any family gathering, we still like to joke that my great aunt got away with murder. It gets a lot of laughs, 50 years after the fact. Personally, I don't think she was a murderess or had any intent to murder him, as her brain was rather addled by that time. Furthermore, although tulip bulbs contain a few toxic glycosides, there are no recorded deaths from ingesting tulip bulbs. Still, it makes a great story.

Every time I hear about tulips, bubbles, onions, and shallots, I get a mental image of my great uncle eating that food and keeling over.

anonymous writes: 

My mother was a child in Holland during the Hunger Winter of 1944-5; tulip bulb soup was commonly served because eating that was better than starving.

Dec

15

 Printed 715 USD or 597 EUR–close to 50% in two days. Not a bad move in my investment book.

So whats next–Do we listen to naysayers? Do we look at the yield curve? Do we look at ECB buying bonds? Do we look at FED raising rates? Do we look at sales for the local pizza store, or how much 3-D printing there is out here?

By now, one has understood, that none of the above matters at this point in-time, and may never do. No, what works is the behaviour of price action as there are (clear) enough with clues of directional moves. Buyers&Sellers are watching price points, breakouts, momentum, retracement levels, sentiment chatter and possibly overbought/oversold territories.

Depending on your time-horizon, you could buy&hold, or take off some betting chips in the very short term. The crypto train will have retracements along the way, but the fundamental question is, whether this asset is a good way of adding diversification or some portion of spice in the portfolio for the long haul. Is this the beginning of a wide spread alternative investment vehicle that will outshine the internet boom era between 95-00?

Perhaps. For now we ride the trend until proven wrong and we don't resort to all kinds of mumbo jumbo, explanations of the past (even though good lessons can be learned) or general "I missed the move" and therefore this crypto thing is bogus. Spare the bullshit, eh. Everyone has their way/style of increasing the value of their investments, and that's the only thing that matters. You can talk, or you can act.

Dec

7

"Researchers find bacteria tied to esophageal cancer"

December 1, 2017

David Lillienfeld writes:

There was a Nobel award in the early part of last century for the discovery of the bacterial cause of cancer. The work was subsequently found to be deficient.

anonymous writes:

If they give Nobel Prizes for common sene then my Grandfather should receive one. As a nine year old boy I was heartbroken when my Granddad told me that our black Lab Duke was sick and not going to get better. I asked him what was wrong and he told me he had cancer, a sickness where the body turns against itself with healthy tissue being taken over by the disease. "Why? What causes this?" I asked. "Well it was probably from his food (diet) or on the instructions he got from his mom and dad since he was a puppy (ie. Genes)".

So why do humans get cancer? Same reason: our diet and our genes. Why do elephants not get cancer? Going out on a limb here… their diet and their genes.

The highest rates of cancer outside of humans in higher order species are the very ones in which we human control the diet: livestock and pets. Given that dog's frequently consume the scraps of their human family's meals one would EXPECT to see a significant correlation to diet induced disease. Veterinarians note that cancer has become much more prevalent in man's best friend in the last half century and again–Captain Obvious–it has also increased discernably in man.

Dec

4

"The power of Groups is that they're where people go to have conversations about specific topics. So, in the context of conspiracist or highly partisan communities, they can become incredibly powerful echo chambers; few people join a group to start challenging the prevailing opinion, and those who do typically get kicked out."

-"Fake News and Rabbit Holes: Radicalization via the Recommendation Engine"

Dec

4

"The Secrets of the Wave Pilots":

What seems clear is that our ability to navigate is inextricably tied not just to our ability to remember the past but also to learning, decision-making, imagining and planning for the future. And though our sense of direction often feels innate, it may develop — and perhaps be modified — in a region of the brain called the retrosplenial cortex, next to the hippocampus, which becomes active when we investigate and judge the permanence of landmarks. In 2012, Maguire and co-authors published their finding that an accurate understanding of whether a landmark is likely to stay put separates good navigators from poor ones, who are as apt to take cues from an idling delivery truck as a church steeple. The retrosplenial cortex passes our decisions about the stability of objects to the hippocampus, where their influence on way-finding intersects with other basic cognitive skills that, like memory, are as crucial to identity as to survival.

Recently, Maguire and colleagues proposed a new unified theory of the hippocampus, imagining it not as a repository for disparate memories and directions but as a constructor of scenes that incorporate both. (Try to recall a moment from your past or picture a future one without visualizing yourself in the physical space where that moment happens.) Edvard and May-Britt Moser have similarly hypothesized that our ability to time-travel mentally evolved directly from our ability to travel in the physical world, and that the mental processes that make navigation possible are also the ones that allow us to tell a story. ''In the same way that an infinite number of paths can connect the origin and endpoint of a journey,'' Edvard Moser and another co-author wrote in a 2013 paper, ''a recalled story can be told in many ways, connecting the beginning and the end through innumerable variations.''

Dec

4

Articles from Goldman paint a bearish picture and they are so flawed in their analysis. This is what the CFA stuff has led to. Gresham's Law.

anonymous writes: 

Does "the CFA stuff" mean the attempt to certify critical thinking and standardise which facts are important?
 

Dec

3

 Ever since the CFA exams I have noticed a tendency for Wall Street research to deteriorate. A Gresham's Law appears to be operating. The articles like the white shoe one I mentioned are chock full of seemingly sapient stuff that are scientifically flawed amid reference to Shiller p/e data with their 10 year averaging and data when no earnings were reported etc. They refuse to take account of interest rates and use technical analysis and charts for suggestive but random conclusions. It is sad to see this deterioration as literacy increases as predicted by Nock.

Alston Mabry writes: 

I find that if I'm really serious about an individual ticker, one of the few places where I can get at least trailheads to research is the earnings conference call, not for the company's answers but more for the analyst's questions, assuming there are analysts on the call who are at least somewhat skeptical. Not that I dig into individual tickers that much anymore.

anonymous writes: 

Vic's point of Gresham's Law happens everywhere, but especially in situations where there are credentials given that appear to have value. IMO the CFA society exists (as does the CMT) primarily to enhance the status of its anointed ones (for a price), and for the side benefit of providing income to the society heads.

Al is right: There is no original thinking and virtually no research. But there is a benefit to us thinking ones: If all of what passes for research is bot-written drivel, released over some time period, a case can be made for trends to exist based on the gradual release of the drivel. That would support the contention that what really drives certain markets is momentum and sentiment.

Never complain about the weaknesses of your opponents; exploit them.
 

Allen Gilespie adds:

In an effort to defend free thinking CFAs from the white shoe firms, I have attached and included a link to my most recent annual analysis on the Dow Jones Industrial Index built on Ben Graham's method's with an added modern twist and nod to Richard Russell in a world of QE. I have also include my white paper on Bitcoin, Banking, and Bernanke in a World of Monetary Chaos from 2013. Prior year reports available to those with a Bloomberg under DIA US equity. Given that the economy now includes industrial businesses and network/software type businesses like MSFT and V I think there is a delta between book value, average ratio and earnings methods due to network value theory and excessive monetary inflation. I am calling this new valuation framework my Gold, Bitcoin, Dow Theory whereby one bitcoin plus one gold coin = one Dow share. Obviously, figuring out the key ratios is key, but in short, the theory is that gold and tangible book on the Dow should trade on a ratio. There will then be the goodwill book value which gets measure by crytpo, so in combination they will equal the value of shares in fiat. In short, there is value but that value is dependent on the value of money, assets, earnings, and interest rates. We live in a world of fiat, hard, and crypto currencies. In short, I think QE is the same as John Law effort to demonitize gold but then cryptos broke out - you can inflate values but the market will find a way to make proper measurements. I have started making all price targets in dollars, gold and bitcoin equivalents - when money is mispriced it is hard to know the value of anything and all secular bear markets are the result of a breakdown in the monetary system (greenbacks - bi-metal system - gold standard - Bretton Woods - Quasi-Free float - Crypto) - bear just don't understand how they play (sometime values decline (deflation) (1929-1932), sometimes they inflate (1966-1982) so nominal prices hold but you loose purchasing power, and sometimes you hyperinflate your values go up but you gotta find a better currency (cyrpto).

The Dow Jones Industrial Average - Fintrust Investment Advisors

Bitcoin, Banking and Bernanke - Fintrust Investment Advisors

Rocky Humbert writes: 

Spurious correlation. The first CFA exam was administered on June 15, 1963 to 278 men and 6 women. In 2017, the pass rate for CFA-I was 43% out of 189,000 candidates. The average starting salary for most CFA's is under $100k.

See page 55 of From Practice to Profession: A History of The Financial Analysts Federation and the Investment Profession

"CFA Says Pass Rate for Level 2 Climbs to 47%, Highest Since 2006"

Russ Sears writes:

While I agree with much of what Rocky states, what appears to be missing from the thread is that the motive for much "rresearsh" is often CYB (cover. your. behind) Designatona helps but the real cause and effect of such proliferation is litigation and regulation.

Gordon Haave writes: 

I'm a CFA and I agree with Vic and Jeff. Almost anything written by a CFA is formulaic and uninteresting.

I get an email once a week from the CFA society linking to all the things on Seeking Alpha that were written by CFA's and they are almost universally worthless.

Rocky Humbert writes: 

Wait a second. The hypothesis proffered by Vic was that "ever since the CFA exams I have noticed a tendency for wall street research to deteriorate. A greshams law appears to be operating."

We are in agreement that virtually all of the research is unhelpful or rubbish. But it is incorrect to to attribute this to the CFA exam or to suggest that this is anew phenomenon. At the very least, it is due to the fact that customers of wall street firms do not pay for the "product." And the price of the product has finally converged to the value. Do you remember Henry Blodgett? Mary Meeker? That was 20 years ago. This isn't news.

Additionally, back in the early 1990's and long before the front-running scandals, David Silfen formed an internal prop group to invest based on GS analyst research. The results were abysmal and the group was disbanded. 

Russ Sears writes: 

While I agree with much of what Rocky states What appears to be missing from the thread is that the motive for much "rresearsh" is often CYB (cover. your. behind) Designatona help but the real cause and effect of such proliferation is litigation and regulation.

Paul Marino writes: 

I agree with you Russ, but in a world where you can pay to know if Fed Powell likes his morning egg hard boiled or over easy I'm a little over easy myself. Bernanke was an oatmeal man. This is Flexionic activity written by Gov's and the Operator's will take every advantage over the common man.

Allen Gillespie writes: 

In an effort to defend free thinking CFAs from the white shoe firms, I have attached and included a link to my most recent annual analysis on the Dow Jones Industrial Index built on Ben Graham's method's with an added modern twist and nod to Richard Russell in a world of QE. I have also include my white paper on Bitcoin, Banking, and Bernanke from 2013. Prior year reports available to those with a Bloomberg under DIA equity. Given that the economy now includes industrial businesses and network/software type businesses like MSFT and V I think there is a delta between book value, average ratio and earnings methods due to network value theory and excessive monetary inflation. I am calling this new valuation framework my Gold, Bitcoin, Dow Theory whereby one bitcoin plus one gold coin = one Dow share. Obviously, figuring out the key ratios is key, but in short, the theory is that gold and tangible book on the Dow will normalize and the delta goes to crytpo, so in combination they will equal the value of shares in fiat. In short, there is value but that value is dependent on the value of money, assets, earnings, and interest rates. We live in a world of fiat, hard, and crypto currencies. In short, I think QE is the same as John Law effort to demonitize gold but then cryptos broke out - you can inflate values but the market will find a way to make proper measurements. I have started making all price targets in dollars, gold and bitcoin equivalents - when money is mispriced it is hard to know the value of anything and all secular bear markets are the result of a breakdown in the monetary system (greenbacks - bi-metal system - gold standard - Bretton Woods - Quasi-Free float - Crypto) - bear just don't understand how they play (sometime values decline (deflation) (1929-1932), sometimes they inflate (1966-1982) so nominal prices hold but you loose purchasing power, and sometimes you hyperinflate your values go up but you gotta find a better currency (cyrpto).

anonymous writes: 

David Simon made a related point to all this with regard to journalism. (He worked for the Baltimore Sun before writing The Wire.) As seasoned journalists who knew their beat were replaced by cheaper fresh faces who can still write words, skepticism and quality deteriorated.

Dec

2

Infographic: Visualizing the Journey to $10,000 Bitcoin

How did Bitcoin jump 10X in value in the matter of just 11 months? This timeline visualizes the events in the journey to $10,000 Bitcoin. After dotcom popped, many companies lost 98% market cap - yet an operating concern remained (YHOO comes to mind). What's behind Bitcoin? I have removed 2000-3000 as an area of support following this weekend's madness. Clearly, she'll end below 1 Alas, as I always said, the hi print is likely prior to CME debut.

Andy Aiken writes: 

"Clearly" and yet Anatoly claims to have no position. Evidently his net worth is tied up in airline vouchers.

anonymous writes: 

Actually the "right" trade during the dotcom bubble was to be long and own low delta, far out of the money puts. The same was true during the silver bubble, the nat gas bubble and all exponential moves. What I find astounding is that some people never learn from their past mistakes. If you don't know who the sucker is at the poker table, look in the mirror…. Of more interest than calling the "top" or "bottom" in bitcoin (or anything else) for bragging rights and which are worthless, what do intelligent people expect the opening futures yield curve/implied interest rate for Bitcoin futures to look like? There is no real borrow market; so should futures be in backwardation? Or should it be upward sloping like a regular currency with a positive interest rate? My guess (based on learning from experience) is that speculative flows will swamp arbitrage flows and so it will be in backwardation so long at the market is rising strongly — and once the price has topped and it starts declining, the yield curve can/will go positive. My instinct is that the shape of the futures yield curve will provide a better clue about the status of the bear/bull debate than pulling numbers out of the air — and it's options on futures where the real fun will be had. Does anyone have a better perspective on this?

Andy Aiken writes: 

Finally an interesting question on this subject. There could be some good spread trade opportunities, since I expect the term structure to move wildly in the initial stage of market development.

I expect it to be mostly in contango at first, but move to a modest backwardation that reflects an implied yield.

Bill Rafter writes: 

From the cheap seats, bubbles tend to coexist with inversions (backwardation). Current uncertainty places a premium on the near month while the distant months play with the expectation of mean-reversion. Isn't that exactly what Bitcoin is all about? So you would expect Bitcoin futures to show backwardation. The only problem is that you cannot build an economically rational model for such a price structure. Thus it seems as though momentum and sentiment will rule the day. Appropriate quote from the Senator: "It is conjecture. When a researcher lacks hard evidence, conjecture is his greatest tool. Some conjecture better than others. Some conclusions are more conclusive than others."

Dec

1

I posted on a friend a while back that started out with 50 servers a year ago mining BTC. He recently found some investors and is scaling up to 2000 servers. Some metrics he follows; on his variable costs (electricity, rent, etc), he budgeted it would take 15 days of mining each month to cover, last month it took 5 days. Return of capital he budgeted 6 months, actually taking 3 months. Break even prices for BTC (marginal mining cost) is $1000 to $1200. Says scale is important, bigger processing capability of 2000 servers allows more profitable transactions. They will soon be #2 in their "pool". He has a good relationship with largest server producer in China and negotiated a power deal in the US with decreasing marginal cost based on usage. On ICO and cryptos in general he would not know a crypto-fork from a salad fork, but knows how to run a business and will ride this wave for as long as it goes, with a good cushion above BTC $1000.

Jim Lackey writes: 

Why isn't Google Amazon or the valley locking this biz? Good question or as usual I'm last to know.

Anatoly Veltman writes: 

I could never understand the ethics of crypto mining "biz". You certainly use up resources–to produce "what"??

J. Hales writes: 

Would your friends ROI be positive without the rally? Or more simply: would his investors have done better simply just buying Bitcoin outright?

Years ago when Bitcoin was trading around $50 I did a lot of research on mining operations almost every single one was essentially equivalent to: long bitcoin - expenses of maintaining servers and operations. None the less, they were extremely popular 'investments' as people liked the cachet of being a technologically sophisticated 'miner.' 

Nov

30

 WSJ featured a chart of BTC vs other bubbles. Usually there is a correlate–such as the desk top computer and tech stocks, gold and political uncertainty (sic), etc.

The only things I can think of that correlate with BTC's trajectory are the frequency of NK nuke tests and due-process free salacious executions of key members of the deep state.

Others?

Andy Aitken writes: 

A key characteristic of a bubble is that the people in it don't recognize that they are in it.

The bubble proclamations about bitcoin seem to come from those who have missed out (i.e., they're "too smart" to participate), as well as from those that stand to lose something. Despite Anatoly's misquoting of me, in response to Jamie Dimon calling bitcoin a fraud, I did not call Jamie Dimon a fraud. I wrote that bitcoin said that Dimon is a fraud. Bitcoin is still less than a $150B market cap, less than a third the size of one company (Cisco) at the height of the internet craze. Which turned out to have not been a "craze". The most chiliastic augurs of a connected humanity, portents of Teilhard de Chardin's noosphere reified, were too conservative. Just 15 years later, there are quite a few tech-oriented companies that have surpassed CSCO's peak valuation, and everyone is tied to the net 24/7 through pocket supercomputers.

In my view, the bubble that is barely acknowledged is the vast scope, size, and scale of the state (not just the government), and its rapacious intrusion into our private lives. This precarious bubble continues to inflate on the premise that there is no diminishing marginal utility of additional units of state power. The gap grows between the linear growth in expectations and the logarithmic returns. If this is a bubble, then bitcoin represents its antithesis.

Rocky Humbert writes: 

Andy, Bubble schmubble. There are sardines for trading and sardines for eating. I submit that the most important trait for successful investors/speculators is knowing the difference. And not becoming an idealogue, philosopher or believer. I suggest that you read the Harvard paper that I posted two days ago a bit more carefully. As the paper reports and I've learned from experience, these moves go much further and last much longer than reasonable people expect. Especially for bitcoin (and real estate markets) since the supply/new issuance is very limited. And since you mentioned Cisco, I believe its high tick war around 85; 17 years later the stock is trading at 38. During its final blowoff phase, the stock appreciated by about 800% and the only trade was to be long. Until it wasn't. And then the only trade was to be short — for about two decades (with most of the move occuring during the first 24 months). Same thing with the Nikkei in 1990. Gold in 1979. Etc. And I feel comfortable predicting that the same thing will be true for BTC but from a final blowoff top of who-knows-where. Lastly, here's a rocky challege: Name one major currency whose value routinely moves around by 20% intra-day? (Other than a government engineered revaluation, of course.) Anyone? Anyone? Of course, it's Bitcoin.

Andy Aitken replies: 

I've been emailed personally by several people on the List who asked what I guess they thought were questions I hadn't considered or couldn't answer.

I've responded with thorough emails with numerous academic and non-academic references, and never received a "thanks" or even an acknowledgement of my time spent. The fact is that I have pulled out many times my investment, and yet those with the strongest opinions have nothing at stake (at least in terms of money, the need to be right is very much in evidence), with no more relevance to the market price than a bucket shop price shouter. I have less certitude about the future price than they do. But what do I know?

I really don't care if people think I am ridiculous or stupid. I'll take my profits while they opinionate. Your benchmark of price stability (USD) has declined in purchasing power by 99.5% since the creation of the Fed just over 100 years ago. This was after a long period of purchasing power stability, or even of productivity-driven deflation. Ah, but those fluctuations in prices (e.g. 1907)! They drove a free people to put the management of their currency in the hands of technocrats. My grandfather retired as a bank vice president about 55 years ago, never having earned more than $10K a year. And yet he and his family lived an upper middle class life, with no mortgage on the brick house on a tree-lined street, cars bought with cash, and a child who went to an expensive private college.

What sort of price stability is this? I hold gold and trade it, and even expect a rally in it, but I think we all know that the CBs would kill any "bubble" in gold, though such a "bubble" might be very much justified. If the state and its extension, the CME, kill bitcoin as Anatoly hopes, then another cryptocurrency (or something like it) will replace it.

There are already several that could replace it. It is a mistake to equate bitcoin with cryptocurrency.

There is the beginning of something here that all lovers of freedom should welcome, even if its name is not bitcoin.

Jason Pilfer writes: 

Victor had a quote about Dimon I recall that sums up many of these bitcoin bubble threads.

"Sounds like one of the non-falsifiable predictions from the adventurous traveler or so many of his ilk that don't have the constraint of having to make a profit with trading.vic"

I admire Andy's instructive tenacity and hope to see more. There remains quite a chasm to bridge. I've argued in the past that cryptos are an ongoing disruption rather than simply a new currency coming into an old framework. Many of the predictions would be more relevant if bitcoin were simply a global fiat currency.

The chartism and top/bottom calling entirely misses the reason why cryptos came into being, are incredibly popular and accelerating in adoption and appeal.

The bubble discussion is weary and likely tied to the ongoing global FOMO effect, yesterday I ran across this Fortune link from two years ago about how to short the megabubble when bitcoin was 1/10th today's price

Not much has changed.

The higher level discussion about CME impact is insightful and appreciated.

Nov

28

"U.S Mint's Silver and Gold Coins Turn to Lead":

The government currently is selling the gold-coin proofs at a 25% markup over per-ounce gold prices, a premium that can run as high as $360 per coin. The silver coins carry a more than 200% premium over market silver prices. That might be well worth it for coin collectors and hoarders—or for stashing in a post-apocalypse bunker along with the guns and freeze-dried macaroni. But some unhappy investors have deposited them into retirement accounts, where the shiny gold and silver coins have performed like lead sinkers. Paul Rumage, a 64-year-old retired software engineer from Michigan, said he was looking for a haven from stocks for his individual retirement account in 2013. A private dealer persuaded him to buy 45 four-coin sets of American Eagle gold proofs, and 979 ounces of silver Eagle proofs, records show. The 1,135-coin treasure of gold and silver cost him $308,000, which included a 6% commission for the broker. Less than a month later, his IRA statement valued the coins at $212,000. "I knew something was wrong," Mr. Rumage said. After filing a lawsuit against the dealer and broker, he sold the coins back at a loss. He since has given up on gold and instead bought land in Arkansas.

Nov

26

From what I gather, the pretensions of moral philosophy to be "scientific" were laughed at when the term "social science" was coined.

Say what you will about the 21st century, one thing that is getting better is that social-science authors have the ability to, and feel some obligation to, post their code and data sources where readers can access them.

EqualityofOpportunity.org/data

^ This warms my heart.

Jeff Watson writes: 

Your post reminded me of an engaging article I read this morning. The article is about the increased bullshit that is being strewn across workplaces worldwide. It describes the origins and history of the bullshit, then examines and illustrates the many different kinds of bullshit being tossed about from the boardroom to the classroom. Well worth the read.

Nov

20

 Outlaws use game theory.

Game theory is the math connected with the analysis of strategies for dealing with competitive situations. The outcome of the participant's choice of action depends critically on the actions of the other participants,

Outlaws, being the majority in Slab City, make this town an apt place to study game theory.

The other anomaly of the population is the individualism. Being individuals, there is primarily non-cooperative game theory. Unlike other games, small town outlaws operate better alone, under the radar, and satisfied with continued repeated small profits toward an eventual fortune, without getting caught.

The way they don't get caught is what I call subconscious game theory. Almost zero of the participants have math skills beyond arithmetic, and yet their IQ's are much higher than the Americans norm. This provides an enormous subconscious space for lightning calculations of game theory.

Some of the finest criminal minds have lived or vacationed here in the past three years. There has been the kidnapper of Patty Hearst, road partner of the JFK shooter, girlfriend of 'El Chapo' Guzman, point man of the Jonestown massacre, principal in the World Trade Center bombing, and an early executioner for Hell's Angels.

Crime is like sport, business, politics, gunfights, or any other competitive setting where what I call the three elements of game theory interact: Game, Play, and Analysis. The Game is the well-defined mathematical setting, the Play is the recipe of action, and the Analysis is the best recipe.

Some examples of game theories that occur daily in Slab City are War of Attrition, Cake Cutting, Truel, Stag and Hare, Chariot Race, Pirate's Party, Peace-War, Dictator, Restaurants, Companies, Coordination, and Brinksmanship.

In War on Attrition the game theory is a dynamic timing contest involving a pause. Slab City Poker players meet at a central table where a timer is set, as each sets off about town in a stealing contest. The various strategies are to go by foot or bicycle, carrying a pack or pushing a cart, and so on. At the end of the timed 'hand' they return to the table to compare loot, trade strategies, and get high, before going out on the town for another hand. The conclusion drawn is there is no value in the pause in Slab City poker because they are all liars, and keep their higher value articles 'in the hole' somewhere so they're not stolen during the next hand.

Slab City is wild with adventure, and a hotbed of lawless game theory. It reminds me of the old west Dodge City where the citizens said, 'Leave me alone, and let me go my own route to hell.' A wicket little town, indeed, its character is so crystal clear that one might conclude is marked for special providence.

Nov

17

The price price of BTC is unlikely exceed 8,000 by much - a reader

Do you play poker? If so, have you ever made money from listening to the people watching the game?

The top call is interesting, but it would be a lot more interesting if you put money on it instead of making paper trade calls, as you have been since BTC was trading at 400.

I suggest 3-6 months of consolidation now that the 2x fork threat has passed (today) without drama.

The rest of the crypto market (i.e. alts such as ETH or app utility tokens such as REP) has been pounded indiscriminately in both BTC and USD terms since August. The attention has been entirely on BTC and its forks, with BTC dominance (market cap of BTC as a % of all crypto) climbing from 40% in June to briefly over 60% last week. The alt bear market has been relentless, taking 75% - 90% off the value of coins for solid, valuable projects with serious PE/VC backing.

Several of these apps will launch on the mainnet to great fanfare in the next few months, and will lift the price on many alts, including some that are undeserving. Coinbase/GDAX will begin allowing trading of some of these in January. Currently they only allow trading in BTC, Ether (ETH), and Litecoin (LTC). Coinbase is all that many new crypto investors know of the market (USD and crypto deposits are insured).

Also, now that Coinbase/GDAX has launched a custody program for digital assets, competitors will follow suit. Soon, institutions will have no compliance barriers to holding crypto and hedging with futures (launching this month on CME) or options (January on the CBOE).

But Wall Street and the CME are latecomers to this party, and with a few exceptions, haven't yet had the opportunity for many "liquidity events" such as what an equity IPO represents. I don't see a close analogy here. Most of the BTC that can exist has already been mined and is available to trade. Anecdotally, I know quite a few serious investors who are clueless about crypto who are champing at the bit to "short the bitcoin bubble" via futures. They haven't bothered to read any of the educational materials I have sent them, don't understand the market beyond what they read in the WSJ and Barron's, and have little but rock-ribbed certitude to justify their position. I expect them to get their education the hard way. IMO in the near term the debut of futures and options will create a tug-of-war. What someone treating it as just another financial asset does not understand is the degree to which network growth, miner hashpower, and difficulty adjustments have on the price. There are, in other words, fundamentals that are reflected in the long-term price trajectory, and complex stakeholder relationships.

I don't call tops (or bottoms), but I do expect a trendless consolidation period for BTC. Consider that following its 4000% run to 420 in June, ETH has traded in a range of 130-380, with trading action concentrated in the high end of that range. I expect ETH to rally while BTC stalls. Price growth has lagged network growth by a significant margin since June, and several of the closely watched use cases/apps are about to launch, which will increase network utilization significantly.

Nov

17

Today we had four people ask us about the likelihood of a current liquidity problem. Someone out there in Financial Journalist Land remembers the last line of the journalist in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valence: If the legend is more interesting than the truth, print the legend.

Here was our response (it's very short). As pictures and charts often do, these compel belief.

Mr. Theo writes: 

Thanks Bill. I would also add that historically the flattening of steep yield has been the best environment for equities.

Nov

14

"Low Volatility and Investor Complacency - the NY Fed Offers An Interesting Analysis":

As discussed in Robert Shiller's Nobel Prize lecture, the original puzzle in financial economics was why stock prices are so volatile relative to dividends. According to the Gordon growth formula, stock prices and dividends should have the same volatility. In the data, however, stock prices are significantly more volatile than dividends. Since the 1950s, stock prices have exhibited 16 percent annualized volatility. That is almost 10 percentage points higher than the "fundamental" volatility of dividends, which has been closer to 7 percent (for example, see Shiller's annual data).

Shiller interpreted these results as evidence that stock prices were inefficient, with investors potentially succumbing to animal spirits, or "waves of optimism and pessimism," to explain the large variation in stock prices (see John Cochrane's discussion of this view in a Grumpy Economist blog post) . Importantly, however, Shiller's analysis assumed a constant discount rate for computing net present values. Subsequent work provided evidence against this assumption. Time-varying discount rates are now a standard feature of asset pricing models that can explain the excess volatility of stock prices relative to dividends (see Discount Rates by Cochrane or Monika Piazzesi's summary of related asset pricing research).

As shown in the previous chart, today's realized volatility is about 6-7 percent. This level is what one would have originally predicted using the Gordon growth formula, suggesting that the low volatility puzzle is perhaps less puzzling than originally thought. Alternatively, if one subscribes to the more recent asset pricing theories, it appears that current volatility is either abnormally low or that discount rate variation has somehow been dampened, leading us back to concerns about investor complacency.

Larry Williams writes: 

The disparity is because investors are more influenced by price than dividends. Dividends are not a driver of emotions, prices are. The waves of optimism or animal spirits are in response to price changes which may feed upon itself.

Theo Dosis writes: 

Also worth mentioning that Schiller's data is garbage.

Ken Sadofsky writes: 

How so?

You needn't encumber your own studies, but perhaps a reference to anything, somethings - studies, that falsify.

I understand mu((c) or (s))h is too vague and convoluted to falsify; but then why false a void?

I ask, because you speak with authority.

Thanks,

a wannabe learner. 

Nov

13

Stocks looking pretty vulnerable in here.

Victor Niederhoffer writes: 

Yes. But remember the senator's golden apple and Vince's admonition that you have to be crazy if you're not long and refresh the dimsonian 40,000 a century and see how it works in Nov and Dec.

Nov

10

 I have always thought of "If" by Rudyard Kipling as a fully developed trading plan. It's on my wall above my trading desk and head.

Charles Pennington writes:

Even this?!

"If you can make one heap of all your winnings
And risk it all on one turn of pitch-and-toss,
And lose, and start again at your beginnings"

That doesn't sound like a good trading plan!
 

Nov

8

 While everyone is focused on the no brainer outcomes in VA and NJ, it's quite interesting to observe that Dems swept all of the low level row office positions in the Bucks County and Montgomery County courthouses near Philadelphia.

This is interesting for two reasons.

1. It has never been the case that incumbents got booted out like this, let alone all of them.

2. These two counties flipping to R over the past three decades are a big reason why Rs have been able to do well in Pa. since these are/were the swing counties.

Apparently no longer. They booted out all the incumbent Rs, something which has never happened.

Wow, people must really hate Trump for that to happen. Of course things can change between now and the midterm elections and the next presidential election.

But this is a huge indicator of where things are going, at least for now, and one you may have missed because who tracks row office elections in county courthouses.

Nov

6

 "We are facing a total reform to find a balance and to cover all the needs and investments of the country." -N. Maduro.

The reform is intended to restructure the debt. Down down like Charlie Brown.

anonymous writes: 

Venezuela is a lesson that things take longer to collapse than one expected. I am surprised that to date none of Maduro's bodyguards has plugged him. When will that happen? Probably when the residents fear the status quo more than change.

Parallels to North Korea? Not really. In the Hermit Kingdom the state has almost total control.

Nov

1

Announcement found here.

"The new contract will be cash-settled, based on the CME CF Bitcoin Reference Rate (BRR) which serves as a once-a-day reference rate of the U.S. dollar price of bitcoin. Bitcoin futures will be listed on and subject to the rules of CME."

Doug Martin writes: 

What do you think the notional value will be per contract?

100 Coins X $6500 = $650,000/contract

5% move per day. Margin requirements would be quite large per contract.

John Netto writes: 

There will be a mini-BTC

Henrik Andersson writes: 

I'm also curious so I called CME and asked. Each contract will represent 1 Bitcoin and when the contract settles you will receive the cash amount of the Bitcoin Reference Rate. 

Oct

23

 An interesting aspect of baseball is that top competitive athletes fail 70% of the time and they are considered good and are paid millions. They play 160 games a year, and no team or player no matter how good can win them all. There are too many variables. They learn to think statistically, and go for percentages. Its a different way of thinking than normal. Specs also fail 40% of the time, at least statistically and that is considered good. Winning and losing tends to be overemphasized in conventional thinking. I wonder what kind of training for youth might change that.

Stefan Jovanovich comments: 

Baseball is about losing most of the/your time; for all the audience cheering and TV noise its natural pace is laconic. So is work. The game outlasts your skills if you are really good or great; it defeats most of us almost immediately. That is why its home has been the parts of "America" that have never had the pretense of being "winners" - the grain farms, the mill towns, the small city (NOT the Large) ghettoes and hoods. The people always knew that the real odds in life are never far from 50/50. 

Oct

23

I've been looking at the Internet of Things from the perspective of security. In medicine, this has become a concern—as it is everywhere else IoT is rearing its head, which is to say everywhere. The process of providing information from one node in a network to another is a transaction, and blockchains provide a means for securely effecting/tracking transactions. Why wouldn't one simply frame the transmissions from an IoT node, then, for an IoT system to assure a secure system (an oxymoron, I know)? I must be misunderstanding a bunch of concepts here, and thought someone might provide some insights that I'm lacking.

Oct

20

It's where we get the saying "All I need is a chip and a seat".

Jeff Watson writes:

Some degenerates have been known to say, "All she needed was another furlong and she would have won."

Oct

20

TRUMP, YELLEN MEETING LASTED FROM 2:00 TO 2:30 - WH OFFICIAL: FOX NEWS

Odds on her staying? I believe she is not long for the Chair.

Oct

15

 The process and speed of Weinstein's demise is an excellent example of the "critical angle of repose." Weinstein's angle of repose was very steep–any number of his widely-known misdeeds could have triggered an avalanche–but his personality, relationships and business acumen resulted in a morphology that had a very steep angle.

One can find numerous analogies in markets and individual companies–John Gutfreund is one example that comes to mind. An astute investor might claim to be able to exit a position/relationship before the angle of repose is reached, but it is nearly impossible to discern luck from brains in this regard.

Oct

12

 A call for preventative measures–less Lamotta, more De Niro?

"Raging Bull: First study to find link between testosterone and stock market instability":

"Based on our findings, professional traders, investment advisories, and hedge funds should limit the risk taken by young male traders," continued Nadler. "This is the first study to have shown that testosterone changes the way the brain calculates value and returns in the stock market and therefore- testosterone's neurologic influence will cause traders to make suboptimal decisions unless systems prevent them from occurring."

anonymous writes: 

That paper fits in well with the overall plan to feminize males in the West. I'm sure this latest generation won't have to worry much about high T levels between the estrogenic impact of leftist culture, environmental toxins, and hormone treatments in youth.

Oct

11

 Publisher's Clearing House directs it's advertising towards the elderly. The advertising format of Publisher's Clearing House (PCH) attracts con men who piggyback on their message and try to extract as much cash as they can from the elderly and unsuspecting by declaring them winners of the big prize.

This hit close to home this week. A few weeks ago, my mother in law called my wife to tell her that Publisher's called to inform her that she won the grand prize of 70 million dollars and a new Mercedes. My wife, ever the skeptic, told her mother that she didn't believe the whole thing, and please don't send any money. Mother in law assured my wife that she didn't send any money.

She mentioned a lawyer/representative of PCH she spoke to who was named Dave Sayer (an actual prize patrol spokesman of PCH). My wife googled this name and got a zillion hits of this Dave Sayer/PCH scam and how to know it's a con. My wife called back and told her mother it was a scam but my MIL didn't believe her. My wife then reported it to the state Attorney General's office, and had one of the officers call my MIL to inform her that this was a total con.

After speaking to my MIL, the officer then called my wife back and said that my MIL had indeed sent cash to this guy via Western Union. She sent $6,000 cash, at least that's what she admitted. The officer thinks it was probably much more as most victims won't ever admit the true damages. My wife confronted her mother to tell her to not send any more money. My MIL said that her money is her business, and to butt out. The problem is that she believes the guy and expects to have a brand new Mercedes delivered this afternoon (Oct 10) and her check for $70 million by the end of the week. Of course it won't show and she can kiss her 6K goodbye. She won't get her 70 million either.

Incidentally, the 6 grand was the tax and delivery charges for the Mercedes. Here's the deal, my MIL is in her early 80s and is quite aware of things. Her mental facilities are not diminished and she's quite bright. Her problem is that she does not believe that people would call on the phone and misrepresent themselves. She thinks she's streetwise enough to recognize a con. The MIL believes in the goodness of human nature and is also a old South Christian woman. She is quite naive and she's also $6K poorer.

My MIL does not think she has been the victim of a con at all, quite the opposite, she is ready to drive her new Mercedes and is ready to sell the Toyota I bought her last year. One thing she does have that all con victims share is an out sized sense of greed, of getting something for nothing. She was never a customer of Publisher's Clearing House. Needless to say, we are very heartbroken and also upset that despite being shown the truth, she is waiting at home for her new car and $70 million. Somehow, I feel that this is going to come out of my pocket.

anonymous writes: 

Anecdotally, I've noticed that the elderly seem very susceptible to being catfished also by Nigerians and others, even if they don't otherwise appear gullible. I guess hope and loneliness are very powerful emotions to be exploited.

Sorry to hear about the MIL and the fact you'll probably being paying for it.

anonymous writes:

Everyone should be aware of this Phishing scam. It almost snagged me and I'm not "elderly" (in actuarial terms at least).

I received a text on my cell phone that says: Alert from CHASE Bank : Your Debit-Card is temporary Locked. Please call us now at 201-754-1565. Thank you for your time

There are two clues that this is bogus. (1) The word temporary is a typo. They meant temporarily. (2) The call back number is in New Jersey. If the text had no typo and an 800 number and perhaps the last 4 digits of my debit card, then I would have called them and been phished. Instead I blocked caller ID and called the number and heard a legitimate sounding Chase autoanswer voice, which detected my caller ID blocking and hung up on me.

I've heard of scams like this during which they record you saying the word "Yes" and then use your recorded voice to purchase goods/services/transfer money. Or it could just have been an attempt at identity theft. Regardless, I forwarded the text to Abuse@Chase.Com and Chase shut down the scammer….for now at least.

It's a jungle out there. Robo callers/texting/emailing makes the marginal cost of solicitation close to zero.

Oct

11

 "A supplement that may block the toxic effects of alcohol"

My friends in the nutritional supplement community tell me that you can enhance the metabolism of blood alcohol to acetate, carbon dioxide, and water and minimize the acetaldehyde molecular logjam by taking oral supplements. L-cysteine, vitamin C, and vitamin B1, which are purported to help.

At supplement doses, they are cheap and harmless at worst. At best: Goodbye, acetaldehyde toxicity; hello, restful sleep. About 200 mg of L-cysteine per ounce of alcohol consumed is sufficient to block a major portion of the toxic effect of acetaldehyde. But because alcohol is absorbed and metabolized rapidly, it may be necessary to take L-cysteine before and concurrently with consumption to maintain protection.

Also, an excess of vitamin C (perhaps 600 mg) can help keep the L-cysteine in its reduced state and "on the job" against acetaldehyde. Experts recommend these doses (with or without extra B1): one round before drinking, one with each additional drink, and one when finished. Some say that this regimen works very well.

Oct

6

 Victor Niederhoffer writes to David Hand:

I am good friend of Steve Stigler and recently read and recommended your book. I came across an interesting coincidence in our mutual field. Every day I post a colored graph of 4 possible outcomes of directions of bond and stocks previous day. 11 of the last 16 occurrences have been yellow days with stocks up bonds down. The binomial prob of that is 1 in 10 million or so. I point out that events have to happen. And this is one of many billions of starting stopping pts and outcomes. Still it seems like an anomaly as I point out, the more important question is what does it portend for future. What's your view? Random or not?

David Hands replies:

Hi Vic,

Thanks for recommending my book!

Can I first check the basis for your calculations. (I may have misunderstood what you meant.) If we take a simple model in which the probability of each of the four types of up/down pairs is equal, and the days are independent, then the probability of getting 11 out of 16 having (stocks up; bonds down) is Choose(16,11)*(0.25^11)*(0.25^5) = about 1 in 4000?

But you presumably chose (to comment on) the pattern (stocks up; bonds down) after having seen the data. So if instead we say what about the probability of any one of the four patterns coming up 11 out of the 16 times, then we have four times the probability. So, now it's 1 in 1000.

That sort of calculation would be ok if we simply had a set of 16 days to look at. But, of course, we are scanning across time. The longer we go on, the more we should expect apparently anomalous sequences to crop up. For example, we should ask not 'what is the probability of getting 11 out of 16 the same?' but 'what's the probability of getting 11 out of 16 consecutive days the same over the past 1000 (or however many) days?'

I really liked your website, which I had not seen before.

All the best

David

Professor David J. Hand Imperial College, London

Pitt T. Maner III adds:

A 1 hour lecture by Prof. David Hand on this subject (2014) is available here.

I was watching Professor Hand's lecture and thought it amusing that he found himself in a situation where a man with his same name was staying at the same hotel at the same. This reminded me that at the University of Alabama about 39 years ago I had, if my memory is right, a Professor Hand for an advanced, introductory chemistry course who was a Harvard graduate. Ironically, the chemist Dr. Hand liked to grade on a curve and on his first test the grade for a "C" was 35% instead of the normal 70%! The first question on this first test involved multiplying/dividing two large numbers and determining the number of significant digits–this took about 15 minutes of the allotted 1 hour test time to do with a calculator but was only worth 5% out of the 100% perfect test score– such a tricky fellow. Now the professors get rated online by the students!

keep looking »

Archives

Resources & Links

Search