Feb
28
Bathtub Theory Part II, from Phil McDonnell
February 28, 2008 |
The Bath Tub Theory is based on the premise that there is a fixed amount of water (money) in the tub at any given time. In the earlier piece we saw that money flowed from Indian stocks to the US with about a 5 to 6 day lead time. However at the core of any reasonable such theory the money must be returned. Just as the wave travels to one side of the tub it must also swirl back to the first side as well because the amount of water is relatively constant for any short period of time. So does the theory hold up and allow the money to return from the US to India?
To answer this question we only need to look at correlations between SPY and INP but, this time, with the SPY etf leading. Following are the correlations between the two with a lag of 5 and 6 days.
lag correlation
5 -10%
6 -18
A regression of the two lagged variables shows an overall correlation of 22%. We also note that the correlations and their respective regression coefficients are negative. This indicates that money flows out of the US and into India as expected by the Bath Tub Theory. For what it is worth the prediction for INP on Monday is a loss of about 1%. But be careful. The standard error for the model is about 3.9% so the prediction is well within one standard error. Over the last 95 days the chances of a successful prediction have been about 58% so its a little bit better than a coin flip.
Comments
1 Comment so far
Archives
- June 2013
- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- Older Archives
Resources & Links
- The Letters Prize
- Pre-2007 Victor Niederhoffer Posts
- Vic’s NYC Junto
- Reading List
- Programming in 60 Seconds
- The Objectivist Center
- Foundation for Economic Education
- Tigerchess
- Dick Sears' G.T. Index
- Pre-2007 Daily Speculations
- Laurel & Vics' Worldly Investor Articles
An abstraction of markets that I have found particularly useful is what I would term a hydraulic theory of market dynamics. If one were to visualize markets as a set of balloons or enclosed reservoirs that are connected so that fluid may flow from one enclosure to another. These balloons are made of different materials that have varying amounts of flexibility, so that certain balloons respond by expanding more or less for any given change in internal pressure. If we allow the fluid in this system to represent money, then we can visualize price rises/falls of a particular asset as changes in the size of its associated balloon. When there is a change in the amount of fluid in a particular asset balloon, the size change is a function of liquidity (or supply) and the margin requirements for purchase of the asset. In general, supply increases will decrease the flexibility of the surrounding material. Likewise, a decrease in the margin requirements (i.e. an increase in systemic leverage) will lead to increased flexibility and a greater increase in size for any given change in fluid pressure.