Looks like you want to use this for Kelly sizing. In practice, your problem there is mu. Your return estimate will be a ton worse than even the very dumbest vol estimator
-
-
Replying to @therobotjames @macrocephalopod
Well, this gets into a few other aspects I'm working on / been thinking about for years. There's quite a bit of evidence that S&P 500 *long-term* (10-yr) geometric returns are predictable based on valuation metrics. Can be modeled as Ornstein-Uhlenbeck process.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @goldstein_aa @macrocephalopod
Don't disagree on the effect, generally. But there's probably a lot less evidence than you might think. Think about how far you're looking forward and back with feature and target calc windows there. How many independent observations do you actually have?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @therobotjames @macrocephalopod
Yes, totally agree. We seem to think a lot alike! Are you familiar with John Hussman? He blocked me on twitter because I talked too much about that issue. He even wrote a blog post referring to me and this issue as "zombie troll bait from hell". :-)
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @goldstein_aa @macrocephalopod
Robot James 🤖 🏖 Retweeted Robot James 🤖 🏖
Hahaha. Badge of honor.https://twitter.com/therobotjames/status/1372384046349623301?s=21 …
Robot James 🤖 🏖 added,
Robot James 🤖 🏖 @therobotjamesReplying to @AgustinLebron3 @M1tchRosenthal @robbevantilloGood stuff guys... Here's a tip. If your scatterplot looks like it has "trails" in it... like something John Hussman would create... then you have overlapping data, and a lot fewer independent data points than you think. pic.twitter.com/VhFtbpzGi11 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @therobotjames @macrocephalopod
Amazing!!! You're the first person (besides myself) I've seen who talks about that "trails" issue! Bugs the crap out of me that almost nobody notices how strange those scatterplots look.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @goldstein_aa @therobotjames
AQR (I think?) had a paper basically debunking the cape ratio for market timing by pointing out that using overlapping 10Y returns on the lhs of a regression and trying to adjust t-stats with newey-west is hopelessly optimistic
2 replies 0 retweets 8 likes -
Instead you should use non-overlapping 1M returns on the lhs but smooth the regressors with a 10Y moving average, which gives the exact same regression coefficients but now you have non overlapping samples so you can do a normal t-test
3 replies 0 retweets 11 likes -
And if you do that you find that the evidence for CAPE predicting equity returns is incredibly weak, t-stat is like 1.5 or something
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @macrocephalopod @therobotjames
Guess you just answered my previous question...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
macrocephalopod Retweeted Adam Goldstein
Looks like you already know this paper though!https://twitter.com/goldstein_aa/status/1372994230369538049 …
macrocephalopod added,
-
-
Looks like I misremembered the t-stat, it was 1.8 using their test rather than 1.5, much less than the NW adjusted 3.5 though. And that is using nearly 2x the data that Hussman uses so I am pretty confident his argument can be safely ignored.
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.