The quantitative schools of investing rely on very high powered mathematics (often drawing on physics and engineering graduate students). They tread on very dangerous ground (often engaging in complex and highly leveraged speculation) and make errors in assumptions about the market conditions upon which the mathematical models they use to invest are based. Fat Tails and Limitations of Normal Distributions describes one common mistake:
Stock market data clearly shows that a normal distribution does not provide a good model of the market. Not every system is defined by a normal distribution - it is common for distributions to be close to normal but there is no reason any system need be. Many statistical tools have as an underlying assumption that the system in question is a normal distribution (therefore to use the tools you need to determine if the system can be classified that way - if not some tools can’t be used).
Crazy as it seems, very smart people continually forget that the markets often experience panics, euphoria, behave in ways that models do not predict, seize up and fail to function… Against the Gods by Peter Bernstein provides a good picture of the chaotic nature of financial market risks. A good book on an example of a mathematical model failure, Long Term Capital Management: When Genius Failed. Another excellent book on financial market chaos is: Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises.
I keep thinking people will learn but so far the faith in numbers seems to outweigh the past examples of overconfident failures.
Related: Data doesn’t lie but you can be fooled - investment risk - Statistics for Experimenters
Comments
9 Comments so far
Smart people can and do make huge mistakes when investing. While mathematical models provide an interesting framework for investing, if they are used too exactly without thought for other variables, the results can be devistating.
I understand there has been a large move toward using highly complex math for financial strategies. I understand many derivatives and other investment vehicles have been created. I just don’t really get what makes some of it engineering…
Maybe the latest huge bailout will change how things are done. I doubt it. New rules will be put in place. Plenty of people will pay politicians plenty of money to assure their methods of subverting the intent of those rules are allowed to continue…
“The Fed though is in the process of a very large change in the composition of its balance sheet, as it will temporarily be holding Agencies as an asset against its liabilities rather than Treasuries…”
[...] and some bad periods. Diversification can help smooth out the extremes but no the markets are often driven by emotion. And those emotions (greed, fear…) cause extreme price swings. I am getting ready to invest [...]
Buffett, the chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A), called the problems facing world markets “unprecedented” and warned of a “disaster” if Congress does not move faster to shore up the economy…
[...] Anyone involved in finance should understand mania in the markets. It is not a shock that financial markets do irrational things. They do so very frequently. Anyone who has not read, Manias, Panics, and Crashes: A History of Financial Crises, should do so. Leverage often is a catalyst that turns bad investments into panics that damage the economy. A previous post on this topic: Misuse of Statistics - Mania in Financial Markets. [...]
[...] “is blood in the street” “buy when everyone else is selling”) but timing frenzy driven markets is basically impossible. A year after a market recovery has started it is easy to see how wise it [...]
[...] Three Sigma Bubble? Nonsense! by Marc Hersch - “Grantham’s argument is fallacious. The assumption underlying the use of three-sigma limits is that the system being characterized is in a state of control.” [investors and economic planners consistently fail to understand the volatility of markets - John, see Misuse of Statistics - Mania in Financial Markets] [...]