MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2928594987 · doi:10.3390/jrfm12020051

Statistical Arbitrage with Mean-Reverting Overnight Price Gaps on High-Frequency Data of the S&P 500

2019· article· en· W2928594987 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Johannes Stübinger, Lucas Schneider

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSharpe ratioMean reversionPairs tradeStatistical arbitrageEconometricsTrading strategyArbitrageEconomicsAlgorithmic tradingTransaction costVolatility (finance)Technical analysisIndex arbitrageHigh-frequency tradingJumpFinancial economicsRisk arbitrageCapital asset pricing modelArbitrage pricing theoryFinanceAlternative trading systemPortfolio

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops a fully-fledged statistical arbitrage strategy based on a mean-reverting jump–diffusion model and applies it to high-frequency data of the S&P 500 constituents from January 1998–December 2015. In particular, the established stock selection and trading framework identifies overnight price gaps based on an advanced jump test procedure and exploits temporary market anomalies during the first minutes of a trading day. The existence of the assumed mean-reverting property is confirmed by a preliminary analysis of the S&P 500 index; this characteristic is particularly significant 120 min after market opening. In the empirical back-testing study, the strategy delivers statistically- and economically-significant returns of 51.47 percent p.a.and an annualized Sharpe ratio of 2.38 after transaction costs. We benchmarked our trading algorithm against existing quantitative strategies from the same research area and found its performance superior in a multitude of risk-return characteristics. Finally, a deep dive analysis shows that our results are consistently profitable and robust against drawdowns, even in recent years.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations5
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial management→Same topicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies→French-language works237,207→