关于昨晚报告提到的Omen的一点小统计:
Hindenburg Omen
There is little doubt that we will be fairly inundated with talk about a technical development that triggered yesterday, the so-called Hindenburg Omen. Even the Financial Times picked it up.
This is one of those things that gets almost reverential treatment from some, nothing but scorn from others, and oftentimes the rules are tweaked to fit whatever agenda the author wants to make (that's the trouble with data mining). Heck, people even disagree over the proper spelling.
I'm not going to go over the rules, as a simple web search for "Hindenburg Omen" will quickly do the job. Suffice it to say that the signal looks for times when there are a relatively large number of stocks making both new 52-highs and lows on the same day, and the momentum of market breadth is declining during an uptrending market.
Like disagreements over the technical aspects of the signal, it's rare to see any two analysts come up with the exact same dates, because breadth data can vary from vendor to vendor. We can't control for that, so using the historical data we've always used, we get a total of 150 days that triggered an Omen since 1965.
The table below shows the S&P 500's performance following those days:
|
1 Day
Later |
1 Week
Later |
2 Weeks
Later |
1 Month
Later |
3 Months
Later |
Avg Return |
-0.2% |
-0.5% |
-1.0% |
-1.6% |
-2.6% |
% Positive |
45% |
33% |
39% |
35% |
29% |
Obviously, that is exceptionally weak. The market most often fell during the short- and intermediate-term, in some cases very heavily. Over the next three months, the most that the S&P was able to rally averaged +5.9%, while the most that it fell averaged -12.6%, more than twice as much.
As the Financial Times points out, the signal is often ignored unless it occurs in a cluster. Let's define "cluster" as three days triggering the Omen within a 30-day window.
The table below shows what happened in the weeks and months following each cluster since '65.
Date |
1 Week
Later |
2 Weeks
Later |
1 Month
Later |
3 Months
Later |
6 Months
Later |
1 Year
Later |
05/21/65 |
-0.4% |
-2.1% |
-4.0% |
-2.3% |
3.9% |
-3.7% |
11/18/65 |
-0.2% |
-1.0% |
-0.6% |
0.5% |
-7.8% |
-11.3% |
02/17/66 |
-1.6% |
-3.7% |
-3.7% |
-8.2% |
-13.5% |
-5.1% |
10/26/67 |
-2.7% |
-2.9% |
-0.5% |
-1.7% |
3.2% |
13.9% |
05/26/69 |
-1.7% |
-3.8% |
-7.0% |
-9.6% |
-10.7% |
-33.6% |
05/12/71 |
-1.8% |
-3.2% |
-1.8% |
-8.0% |
-8.2% |
1.8% |
03/24/72 |
0.0% |
1.8% |
-0.4% |
0.7% |
0.9% |
3.8% |
03/26/74 |
-4.7% |
-5.5% |
-8.6% |
-9.2% |
-30.6% |
-16.2% |
06/01/78 |
2.9% |
1.0% |
-1.9% |
6.3% |
-3.7% |
1.8% |
10/08/79 |
-5.9% |
-8.3% |
-7.9% |
-0.8% |
-7.9% |
19.9% |
12/26/79 |
-2.4% |
2.0% |
5.4% |
-8.4% |
8.3% |
26.1% |
07/23/86 |
-0.9% |
-0.8% |
4.6% |
-1.2% |
12.2% |
29.2% |
10/06/87 |
-1.5% |
-25.8% |
-22.0% |
-18.9% |
-16.8% |
-15.2% |
03/14/94 |
0.2% |
-1.6% |
-4.5% |
-1.1% |
0.0% |
5.5% |
10/25/95 |
0.3% |
1.6% |
3.0% |
5.9% |
12.1% |
21.4% |
01/12/98 |
4.2% |
3.2% |
8.6% |
18.8% |
25.4% |
32.0% |
12/07/99 |
-0.4% |
1.7% |
-0.4% |
-3.0% |
4.4% |
-2.3% |
04/11/06 |
1.8% |
1.5% |
1.5% |
-2.2% |
5.2% |
12.9% |
07/11/07 |
1.8% |
0.0% |
-4.3% |
3.1% |
-7.2% |
-17.5% |
10/25/07 |
-0.4% |
-2.6% |
-7.1% |
-10.6% |
-7.8% |
-42.1% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Median |
-0.4% |
-1.3% |
-1.8% |
-1.9% |
-1.8% |
1.8% |
% Positive |
30% |
35% |
25% |
30% |
50% |
55% |
Once again, not a pretty picture for the bulls. While the signal seemed to lose some effectiveness post-1980, the last couple were spot-on.
This is not an automatic sell signal (nothing ever is), but it's certainly troubling. The signal is effectively bearish on its own, but I will be especially wary if we get another couple of days that trigger the Omen within the next few weeks. |