Reversal

Professor Robert Shiller’s CAPE (cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings) ratio is well-known among the investment community. His methodology for assessing a valuation of the U.S. equity market is undoubtedly the most cited and discussed. Therefore, it’s not surprising that there exists quite a lot of papers that try to refine and expand the CAPE’s methodology. One such last attempt is the work of James White and Victor Haghani, whose research paper revolves around the use of a modified version of the Cyclically-Adjusted Price Earnings (CAPE) ratio, termed P-CAPE. Their methodology aims to improve the estimation of long-term expected real returns of the stock market by incorporating the dividend payout ratio into the traditional CAPE metric.

In the fast-paced world of cryptocurrencies, understanding market sentiment can provide a crucial edge. As investors and traders seek to anticipate the volatile movements of Bitcoin, innovative approaches are continuously explored. One such method involves leveraging Google Trends data to gauge public interest and sentiment towards Bitcoin. This approach assumes that search volume on Google not only reflects current interest but can also serve as a predictive tool for future price movements. This blog post delves into the intricacies of using Google Trends as a sentiment predictor, exploring its potential to forecast Bitcoin prices and discussing the broader implications of sentiment analysis in the financial market.

Investing in emerging markets (EM) or developed markets (DM) outside of the United States tends to follow cyclical trends. At times, it becomes popular and crowded to focus solely on U.S. stocks, while in other periods, the trend shifts to favor everything except U.S. equities. This inclination often relies on historical and past performance data, although it doesn’t guarantee identical outcomes in the future. But what drives these periods of popularity? When do U.S. markets outperform Emerging Markets or other Developed Markets? When do large-cap stocks outperform small-cap stocks, and when do growth stocks outperform value stocks? Are those ebbs and flows in the performance of major thematic investments somehow interlinked, and can we uncover some insights into why this occurs? Those are the questions we will try to answer in the following analysis.

The motivation for this study comes from the idea of simplifying the concept of relative valuation among the countries. There exist several ideas for relative value approaches that compare the “visible price” (or market capitalization) of the stock market to some unseen “intrinsic value” of the market. The ideas of what we can use to measure the unseen “intrinsic value” of each individual country/market are numerous – it may be a number derived from GDP (like in a Buffet Indicator), total earnings of listed companies in the selected country (Shiller’s CAPE ratio), or ratios derived from yields, demographic, etc., etc. We asked ourselves – can we create a relative valuation model and use just the price data?

Some of the more vague terms in Technical Analysis are really hard to quantify as nearly every TA user defines and interprets them differently. We mean mainly TA patterns like supports, resistances, trend lines, double tops, double bottoms, and/or more complex patterns like head-and-shoulders. Now, what we can do with that? We tried to spend some time and fought a little with some of these TA terms, and the following article/study results from our attempts to quantify a tiny subset of the world of Technical Analysis patterns.

It would be great if the investment factors and trading strategies worked all around the world without change and under all circumstances. But, unfortunately, it doesn’t work like that. Some of the strategies are market-specific, as shown in this short analysis. The Chinese market has its own specifics, mainly higher representation of retail investors and lower efficiency. And it’s not alone; countless strategies work just in cryptocurrencies, selected futures, or some other derivatives markets. So, what’s the takeaway? Simple, it’s really important to understand that each anomaly is linked to the underlying dataset and market structure, and we need to account for it in our backtesting process.