Logique
Investor
- Joined
- 18 April 2007
- Posts
- 4,290
- Reactions
- 768
"Of the 32 markets we examined, all showed higher than average returns around the turn of the (lunar) month ... and for many of the markets, the average return for the rest of the month was below, or close to, zero."
"In many markets, a very clear increase in average returns can be seen leading into the lunar new month."
The results, the analysis said, showed that without exception every market showed a very slight increase in the average return over the new moon period.
Ah "many", my favourite weasel word. How many is many, exactly? Are we talking many-number, or many-proportion?
And "higher than average" is always good for a run. About half of most ranges are higher than average. Of all the days of every month, about half are slightly above average in temperature, too. Welcome to stats.
...so they'll quote the exact number of markets (32) but not the number with the dramatic result (just "many").
So how much is that increase?
Yeah, surprise me. And, way to go news media, this "very slight increase" was earlier described as a "strong surge".
We know there are folk who trade on silly stuff like lunar cycles. Seems to me that this is plenty to explain a "very slight" effect on averages. That, I can believe. Claims of a statistically significant "surge" would need some real numbers to back them up.
99% of people who claim that statistics can be used to mislead people have either murdered, tortured, dismembered, severely harmed or mildly harmed their very own parents.
Do you honestly want to be a part of that group? Shame on you.
99% of people who claim that statistics can be used to mislead people have either murdered, tortured, dismembered, severely harmed or mildly harmed their very own parents.
Do you honestly want to be a part of that group? Shame on you.
I'm not advocating the theory or otherwise, it's just information.
The following is from The Australian - Business, on 23 Dec 2009, link: http://www.theaustralian.com.au/bus...e-lunatic-fringe/story-e6frg91o-1225812989219
"Now, backed with decades of data and behaviour that can no longer be explained by purely rational analysis, the lunar theory has slipped into the mainstream.
In a piece of research that involved 14 of its senior analysts from across five leading financial centres scrutinising data from 32 leading indices over several decades, Macquarie Securities has arrived at a startling discovery: the two days on either side of the new lunar month represent most of the positive returns on equity markets for the next four weeks".
"Using data since 1988 for a wide variety of indices," the report concluded, "it is quite clear that a strong surge in returns can be seen leading into the turn of the (lunar) month."
Next New Moon: 15 Jan 2010.
Next Full Moon: 31 Dec 2009
We hold these truths to be self-evident
=====
If the new moon is deemed positive, then the full moon may be seen as
POTENTIALLY negative ..... marking the end of a positive move, started
around the new moon, for example.
What deems a new moon positive?
What deems a new moon positive?
"mildly harmed their very own parents" would just about cover everyone that put their mother through a nine month gestation period, give or take a month for the early or late arivals. Then of course there would be the torture a parent goes through trying to deal with teenagers.
Law enforcement authorities and hospital casualty departments could tell a story on the effects of a full moon on human psychology.
It's a myth.
Quite apart from my own experience (I'm in emergency management) which satisfies me that there is no correlation, there are plenty of debunkings all over the net. For example, near the top of a google search for "lunar effect": http://www.skepdic.com/fullmoon.html - note especially the references at the end.
As with all trading systems, the proof is in the out-of-sample results. Using 1/1/2005 through 1/1/2007 as out-of-sample, the relationship completely fell apart. About 80 of the 100 time slots reversed. Keeping the same system as was discovered using the in-sample data, the out-of-sample results were a median annual gain of about -11% (a loss of 11% per year).
As always, do your own research.
Thanks for listening,
Howard
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?