IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1808.07949.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Black Magic Investigation Made Simple: Monte Carlo Simulations and Historical Back Testing of Momentum Cross-Over Strategies Using FRACTI Patterns

Author

Listed:
  • Jorge Faleiro
  • Edward Tsang

Abstract

To promote economic stability, finance should be studied as a hard science, where scientific methods apply. When a trading strategy is proposed, the underlying model should be transparent and defined robustly to allow other researchers to understand and examine it thoroughly. Like any hard sciences, results must be repeatable to allow researchers to collaborate, and build upon each other's results. Large-scale collaboration, when applying the steps of scientific investigation, is an efficient way to leverage "crowd science" to accelerate research in finance. In this paper, we demonstrate how a real world problem in economics, an old problem still subject to a lot of debate, can be solved by the application of a crowd-powered, collaborative scientific computational framework, fully supporting the process of investigation dictated by the modern scientific method. This paper provides a real end-to-end example of investigation to illustrate the use of the framework. We intentionally selected an example that is self-contained, complete, simple, accessible, and of constant debate in both academia and the industry: the performance of a trading strategy used commonly in technical analysis. Claims of efficiency in technical analysis, referred derisively by some sources as "Black Magic", are of widespread use in mainstream media and usually met with a lot of controversy. In this paper we show that different researchers assess this strategy differently, and the subsequent debate is due more to the lack of method than purpose. Most results reported are not repeatable by other researchers. This is not satisfactory if we intend to approach finance as a hard science. To counterweight the status quo, we demonstrate what one could do by using collaborative and investigative features of contributions and leveraging the power of crowds.

Suggested Citation

  • Jorge Faleiro & Edward Tsang, 2018. "Black Magic Investigation Made Simple: Monte Carlo Simulations and Historical Back Testing of Momentum Cross-Over Strategies Using FRACTI Patterns," Papers 1808.07949, arXiv.org.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1808.07949
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1808.07949
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Park, Cheol-Ho & Irwin, Scott H., 2004. "The Profitability of Technical Analysis: A Review," AgMAS Project Research Reports 37487, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics.
    2. Carmen M. Reinhart & Kenneth S. Rogoff, 2010. "Growth in a Time of Debt," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 100(2), pages 573-578, May.
    3. T. Bisig & A. Dupuis & V. Impagliazzo & R. B. Olsen, 2012. "The scale of market quakes," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 501-508, July.
    4. Cheol‐Ho Park & Scott H. Irwin, 2007. "What Do We Know About The Profitability Of Technical Analysis?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 21(4), pages 786-826, September.
    5. Hoffmann, Arvid O.I. & Shefrin, Hersh, 2014. "Technical analysis and individual investors," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PB), pages 487-511.
    6. Franzoni, Chiara & Sauermann, Henry, 2014. "Crowd science: The organization of scientific research in open collaborative projects," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 1-20.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jorge Faleiro & Edward Tsang, 2018. "Supporting Crowd-Powered Science in Economics: FRACTI, a Conceptual Framework for Large-Scale Collaboration and Transparent Investigation in Financial Markets," Papers 1808.07959, arXiv.org.
    2. Tsai, Yi-Cheng & Lei, Chin-Laung & Cheung, William & Wu, Chung-Shu & Ho, Jan-Ming & Wang, Chuan-Ju, 2018. "Exploring the Persistent Behavior of Financial Markets," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 199-220.
    3. Lukas Menkhoff & Mark P. Taylor, 2007. "The Obstinate Passion of Foreign Exchange Professionals: Technical Analysis," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 45(4), pages 936-972, December.
    4. Alexeev, Vitali & Tapon, Francis, 2011. "Testing weak form efficiency on the Toronto Stock Exchange," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 661-691, September.
    5. Anghel, Dan Gabriel, 2021. "Data Snooping Bias in Tests of the Relative Performance of Multiple Forecasting Models," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    6. Ebert, Sebastian & Hilpert, Christian, 2019. "Skewness preference and the popularity of technical analysis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    7. Paolo Mazza & Mikael Petitjean, 2019. "Testing the effect of technical analysis on market quality and order book dynamics," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(18), pages 1947-1976, April.
    8. Zhaobo Zhu & Licheng Sun, 2024. "When Buffett Meets Bollinger: An Integrated Approach to Fundamental and Technical Analysis," Post-Print hal-04703041, HAL.
    9. Tsung-Hsun Lu & Jun-De Lee, 2016. "Is Abnormally Large Volume a Clue?," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(9), pages 226-233, September.
    10. Vicky Henderson & Saul Jacka & Ruiqi Liu, 2021. "The Support and Resistance Line Method: An Analysis via Optimal Stopping," Papers 2103.02331, arXiv.org.
    11. Steininger, Lea & Hesse, Casimir, 2024. "Buying into new ideas: The ECB’s evolving justification of unlimited liquidity," Department of Economics Working Paper Series 357, WU Vienna University of Economics and Business.
    12. Sebnem Kalemli-Ozcan & Herman Kamil & Carolina Villegas-Sanchez, 2016. "What Hinders Investment in the Aftermath of Financial Crises: Insolvent Firms or Illiquid Banks?," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 98(4), pages 756-769, October.
    13. Balima, Hippolyte Weneyam, 2020. "Coups d’état and the cost of debt," Journal of Comparative Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(3), pages 509-528.
    14. Michael A. Clemens, 2017. "The Meaning Of Failed Replications: A Review And Proposal," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(1), pages 326-342, February.
    15. Slimani, Slah & Bakari, Sayef & Othmani, Abdelhafidh, 2015. "Croissance et Soutenabilité de la Dette Extérieure Tunisienne pour la Période 1970-2012 : Une Analyse Dynamique [Growth and Sustainability of Tunisian External Debt for the Period 1970-2012: A Dyna," MPRA Paper 80954, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Peppel-Srebrny, Jemima, 2021. "Not all government budget deficits are created equal: Evidence from advanced economies' sovereign bond markets," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    17. Julian Koch & Simon Stisen, 2017. "Citizen science: A new perspective to advance spatial pattern evaluation in hydrology," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-20, May.
    18. Yang, Jialiang & Li, Yaokuang & Calic, Goran & Shevchenko, Anton, 2020. "How multimedia shape crowdfunding outcomes: The overshadowing effect of images and videos on text in campaign information," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 6-18.
    19. Cozzi, Marco, 2023. "Public debt and welfare in a quantitative Schumpeterian growth model with incomplete markets," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    20. António Afonso & Yasfir Ibraimo, 2020. "The macroeconomic effects of public debt: an empirical analysis of Mozambique," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 52(2), pages 212-226, January.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1808.07949. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.