Maserati wrote:
Dow futures cruising along around 275 down, more or less meaningless.
I agree. My (likely plain wrong) sense is that the volatility is dying down, and we can expect a smoother steady downhill trajectory for coming days.
I hope I am wrong!
old math professor wrote:
Giles Corey wrote:
Wuhan reports no new virus cases, offering hope to the world.
AOL headlines today.
Getting ready for the bounce-back?
No.
They are going to flip the script at some point.
the idiot wrote:
Maserati wrote:
Dow futures cruising along around 275 down, more or less meaningless.
I agree. My (likely plain wrong) sense is that the volatility is dying down, and we can expect a smoother steady downhill trajectory for coming days.
I hope I am wrong!
Volatility in what sense? Intrinsic volatility? Maybe. But VIX has risen to levels that no one really thought possible before. ETF redemption from ridiculous options chains are contributing to the cash crunch I believe. I'd expect it to continue a bit more
That is my sense.
Looking at AAPL, MSFT, they are only down to late October 2019 levels. Those types of megacaps seem to be holding up well, people seem to be clinging to them. Maybe not a bad strategy for long-termers
Oil & gold volatility indexes are also near records. No objective measure shows volatility down
Maserati wrote:
That is my sense.
Looking at AAPL, MSFT, they are only down to late October 2019 levels. Those types of megacaps seem to be holding up well, people seem to be clinging to them. Maybe not a bad strategy for long-termers
My AAPL sold last week at a very nice profit after a 10% trailing stop kicked in. I almost bought back in yesterday and will continue to look at it closely. As reported, I did buy MSFT.
I still have some dry powder for more buying. Seems like a good idea since our contrarian indicator is advising against it.
Dxy over 102, and gold moving down in USD.
my hopes for today:
A stock move of less than 5% either way.
Bond ETFs to rise and start moving back to NAV
Racket wrote:Volatility in what sense?
In the sense that I expect (but am well prepared to be proven wrong) that the daily gyrations are settling down, and we won't see the +/- 10% swings.
(Idiotic) opinion only...
Giles Corey wrote:
old math professor wrote:
No.
They are going to flip the script at some point.
Wouldn't surprise me at all if the narrative changes from bad to good overnight, and that will no doubt cause a bump to the upside in stocks.
Oil up 9% or so, that's a good thing. among a sea of merde.
A buddy of mine at Merck thinks we could see a peak by mid April.
Here's a good website to follow:
old math professor wrote:
Giles Corey wrote:
They are going to flip the script at some point.
Wouldn't surprise me at all if the narrative changes from bad to good overnight, and that will no doubt cause a bump to the upside in stocks.
There's two hurdles to overcome. The first is the virus and quarantine stuff which we still haven't cleared. The second is the economic impact which we won't know until Q1-Q2 earnings (assuming the virus has cleared by April) and unemployment numbers and such. There's at least a month's worth of uncertainty left in the market to push it up or down by 10%
old math professor wrote:
A buddy of mine at Merck thinks we could see a peak by mid April.
Here's a good website to follow:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html?fbclid=IwAR3KosAEby44ZT40HtwXx2CQdretCAV80XQlzV_EyjHtypYwPOE7iHiPEm4#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6
Yeah that's why I'm looking at Italy+iran+spain numbers.
If I were better at stats I would try to correlate the curve in those three countries to the curve in China, SK, Japan and see if there is a correlation.
Because if multiple diverse countries all follow the same sort of curve, then we can start projecting with some certitude of how affected countries will go.
Although it should be better from here on out because scientists, doctors, politicians, people are learning how to fight this thing, and now we have some time to ramp up care.
old math professor wrote:A buddy of mine at Merck thinks we could see a peak by mid April.
I've been working on this problem very closely in support of my company. I don't pretend to have expertise in this area (I'm an engineer, not an epidemiologist), but the crisis has forced a lot of people to become highly engaged armchair epidemiologists. One of my colleagues has used a logistic growth model to project that Italy will peak by the end of the month, and here within 4-6 weeks. I believe that to be at the optimistic end of the spectrum, but will gladly be proven wrong.
agip wrote:...if multiple diverse countries all follow the same sort of curve, then we can start projecting with some certitude of how affected countries will go.
Here is a plot showing the growth of "confirmed cases" by country, normalized to population, with time scale set such that day 0 is the day the cases reach ~ 1 per 100,000 population:
https://ibb.co/zHRhbzvSome notable countries have kept cases much lower including Taiwan, Japan and Singapore, all at < 1 case per 100,000. The rest of China outside the epicentre in Hubei only reached 1 per 100,000. Countries in the Americas (I've shown US, Canada and Chile) are currently between 1 and 2, but on the same trend as China and notable European countries. The worst case so far is at Hubei, which reached 115 per 100,000. Time will tell whether Italy and Spain sail past that mark or don't, and that will help constrain expectations in the Americas. We should see a lot in the next couple of weeks that will give us insight as to how the following few weeks to few months will unfold here.
the idiot wrote:
agip wrote:...if multiple diverse countries all follow the same sort of curve, then we can start projecting with some certitude of how affected countries will go.
Here is a plot showing the growth of "confirmed cases" by country, normalized to population, with time scale set such that day 0 is the day the cases reach ~ 1 per 100,000 population:
https://ibb.co/zHRhbzvSome notable countries have kept cases much lower including Taiwan, Japan and Singapore, all at < 1 case per 100,000. The rest of China outside the epicentre in Hubei only reached 1 per 100,000. Countries in the Americas (I've shown US, Canada and Chile) are currently between 1 and 2, but on the same trend as China and notable European countries. The worst case so far is at Hubei, which reached 115 per 100,000. Time will tell whether Italy and Spain sail past that mark or don't, and that will help constrain expectations in the Americas. We should see a lot in the next couple of weeks that will give us insight as to how the following few weeks to few months will unfold here.
yeah but 'confirmed cases' relies on testing so I have pretty much ignored that stat.
eventually, when every country has done a lot of testing, it will mean something, but that's not yet.
and it ignores the clear demographic features of this thing...that young people have zero symptoms and old people die of it. (exagerating for effect). Plus it ignores the geography...that in italy the cases are tightly packed...not distributed geographically. That's going to have a big affect on stopping this thing
the idiot wrote:
old math professor wrote:A buddy of mine at Merck thinks we could see a peak by mid April.
I've been working on this problem very closely in support of my company. I don't pretend to have expertise in this area (I'm an engineer, not an epidemiologist), but the crisis has forced a lot of people to become highly engaged armchair epidemiologists. One of my colleagues has used a logistic growth model to project that Italy will peak by the end of the month, and here within 4-6 weeks. I believe that to be at the optimistic end of the spectrum, but will gladly be proven wrong.
Here's some questions for your coworker :
Why a logistic growth model? Why not a gamma model? What are the coefficients of the sigmoid curve? Or is it a Gompertz curve? How did he/she derive the coefficients? What are the assumptions?
agip wrote:yeah but 'confirmed cases' relies on testing so I have pretty much ignored that stat.
Definitely true. Italy has almost 3000 fatalities today, and fatalities are the most reliable data (but still biased or incomplete in many countries), which suggests that something like 300,000 Italians were infected over the past couple of weeks (assuming an overall mortality rate of about 1%, which seems to be the best consensus among experts), compared with reported confirmed cases of 35,000 as of today. People who are careful with the data and pay attention to the biases and uncertainties can still draw meaning from them. You (imo) shouldn't dismiss the data.
agip wrote:
old math professor wrote:
A buddy of mine at Merck thinks we could see a peak by mid April.
Here's a good website to follow:
https://www.arcgis.com/apps/opsdashboard/index.html?fbclid=IwAR3KosAEby44ZT40HtwXx2CQdretCAV80XQlzV_EyjHtypYwPOE7iHiPEm4#/bda7594740fd40299423467b48e9ecf6Yeah that's why I'm looking at Italy+iran+spain numbers.
If I were better at stats I would try to correlate the curve in those three countries to the curve in China, SK, Japan and see if there is a correlation.
Because if multiple diverse countries all follow the same sort of curve, then we can start projecting with some certitude of how affected countries will go.
Disagree, even if it were possible to collect the information. The problem is as much a political and economic one as it is a medical one.