May

17

An analysis of runs of "up" days (i.e., Close-Close change is positive) in the S&P, through 2 May of this year:

And then I asked an AI to model flipping a coin biased in the same way (53.7% heads), and you can see the results here.

Anatoly Veltman comments:

Yes you're putting numbers out - no complaint there. Huge complaint on the premise: why would 9-day "run" into tomorrow bear same fruit as some totally different 9-day "run"?? What's a "run"; why would different-size price increases under all different relevant variables have the same impact on further trajectory - just because you assigned the same "9-day length" value to current "run"??? IMHO this sort of input can't be expected to help much.

Big Al responds:

That's actually the point: when we assign importance to runs of days, we have to be careful because the run distribution in actual data looks like the distribution you get doing a coin-tossing exercise with a market-biased coin. Which doesn't mean that analyzing runs can't produce anything useful, just that there is a high hurdle.

Anatoly Veltman adds:

My point is mostly about DIFFERENTLY-SIZED up-days. Some days could've been up $2, while others $200…Some days might have been not up-days in SP500 index, while up-days in SP500 futures. And dozen other variabilities that would make one "9-day run" be vastly different from other "9-day run" in impact on future expectations. Not that there are many ideal ways of Input, but this sort may just be prohibitively flawed.


Comments

Name

Email

Website

Speak your mind

Archives

Resources & Links

Search