MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2253280407 · doi:10.1093/rof/rfv035

The Performance of Market Timing Measures in a Simulated Environment

2015· article· en· W2253280407 on OpenAlexafffund
Stéphane Chrétien, Frank Coggins, Félix d’Amours

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Finance Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsDesjardinsUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité Laval
FundersHong Kong University of Science and TechnologyUniversité Laval
KeywordsTimerEconometricsRobustness (evolution)Computer scienceMarket timingEquity (law)StatisticsSampling (signal processing)EconomicsMathematicsFinancial economics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Using simulations controlling for the ability to time the equity, bond, and money markets, we compare daily and monthly performance measures. Our main results highlight the joint importance of the fictitious timer’s trading frequency and the data sampling frequency for estimation. Specifically, daily timing measures are superior to those estimated monthly for daily timers, but inferior for occasional or monthly timers. Global measures show more robustness to differences in trading and data sampling frequencies. Finally, conditional measures do not improve upon unconditional ones, and results are similar for performance detection versus ranking.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.814
Threshold uncertainty score0.473

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.074
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.148 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Finance ReviewSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207