CORRELATION BETWEEN
TRADING MODELS
King's College LondonTuesday 2 December 2008
This presentation is for informational/academic purposes only.
Emmanuel Acar
• Trading modelsWhat are we talking about ? 1988 - 12 technical trading systems [7], [8]2008 - 7,846 technical trading rules [10] broken into 5 families*Is the distinction arbitrary ?What about econometrics models ?What about fundamental strategies ?
• Similarities and DifferencesCan it be quantified ?Does it requires back-testing ? What can be assessed ex-ante ?What needs to be estimated ?
* Filter, Moving Average, Support and Resistance, Channel Break-outs, and On-balance Volume
Motivations & uses
• Academics and Researchers - Difficult to test Random Walk Hypothesis using technical indicators [12]- Avoid pitfalls and duplication- Facilitate research
• Investment Managers- Strengthen portfolio construction- Allow quantification of revisions for single strategy that needs refinements
Motivations & uses
1) A few theoretical results
2) Application to the FX markets
3) Portfolio implications
4) Challenges ahead
Simplified Notations
• Two underlying assets whose passive Buy & Hold returns are denoted and correlated (Gbp/Usd & Eur/Usd), (Ftse & Dax) or (Usd/Jpy and Ftse)
• To generate his position in each markets, the trader uses a forecasting technique respectively denoted and correlated Momentum of length 5 days on Gbp/Usd, Simple Moving average of length 20 days on Eur/Usd
1X 2X x
1F 2F f
• Units in quantity are held when the forecast is positive (negative) with i=1,2.
• The returns generated by the forecasting rules are denoted . That is:
0FifXb
0FifXaH
iii
iiii
)b(a ii
iF
iH
7
Momentum of length 5 days applied to Gbp[/Usd] Sep Contract
F1=P1[t]-P1[t-5]
1.65
1.7
1.75
1.8
1.85
1.9
1.95
2
14/0
7/20
08
16/0
7/20
08
18/0
7/20
08
20/0
7/20
08
22/0
7/20
08
24/0
7/20
08
26/0
7/20
08
28/0
7/20
08
30/0
7/20
08
01/0
8/20
08
03/0
8/20
08
05/0
8/20
08
07/0
8/20
08
09/0
8/20
08
11/0
8/20
08
13/0
8/20
08
15/0
8/20
08
17/0
8/20
08
19/0
8/20
08
21/0
8/20
08
23/0
8/20
08
25/0
8/20
08
27/0
8/20
08
29/0
8/20
08
31/0
8/20
08
02/0
9/20
08
04/0
9/20
08
-8%
-4%
0%
4%
8%
12%
16%
20%
P1[t] P1[t-5]
X1=Ln(P1[t+1]/P1[t])
8
Simple Moving Average of length 20 days applied to Eur[/Usd] Sep Contract
F2=P2[t]-SMA2(20)
1.25
1.3
1.35
1.4
1.45
1.5
1.55
1.6
14/0
7/20
08
16/0
7/20
08
18/0
7/20
08
20/0
7/20
08
22/0
7/20
08
24/0
7/20
08
26/0
7/20
08
28/0
7/20
08
30/0
7/20
08
01/0
8/20
08
03/0
8/20
08
05/0
8/20
08
07/0
8/20
08
09/0
8/20
08
11/0
8/20
08
13/0
8/20
08
15/0
8/20
08
17/0
8/20
08
19/0
8/20
08
21/0
8/20
08
23/0
8/20
08
25/0
8/20
08
27/0
8/20
08
29/0
8/20
08
31/0
8/20
08
02/0
9/20
08
04/0
9/20
08
-8%
-4%
0%
4%
8%
12%
16%
20%
P2[t] SMA2(20)
X2=Ln(P2[t+1]/P2[t])
1) A few theoretical results
10
•
Problem: Distribution of H or at least moments E(H),Stdev(H)..Assumption:
With
Introduction: Modelling Single Trading Rule on Single Market
0FifXb
0FifXaH
0Fifb
0FifaB
),(N~F
X2ffxxf
fxxf2x
f
x
xx* /)X(X ff
* /)F(F
*xx
*xx XBB)X(BXBH )XB(E)B(E)H(E *
xx
)XbXa()](b)(a[)H(E*X *F
*
*X *F
*x
f
f
f
fx
f
f
f
f
)5.0exp(2
)ba()](b)(a[)H(E
2f
2f
xfxf
f
f
fx
See [1] for further results
11
Assumptions (See [2], with # notations)
)
00
00
00
00
,
0
0
0
0
(~
F
F
X
X
22f2f1ff
2f1ff21f
22x2x1xx
2x1xx2
1x
2
1
2
1
12
Correlation between rule returns
• Under assumptions specified in [2]:
))sin(Arc
2
1
4
1(aa[
baba5.0)H,H(Corr f212
222
21
21
x21h
))]sin(Arc2
1
4
1(bb))sin(Arc
2
1
4
1(ab))sin(Arc
2
1
4
1(ba f21f21f21
13
• What an improvement !!!Even I assume the position sizes to be given to estimate correlation between rule returns I need to:(1) estimate correlation between markets (2) correlation between forecasting strategies(3) use a complicated mathematical formula !
Not always so…………
)b(a ii
h
fx
14
Symmetrical strategies
• Position sizes and 1aa 21 1bb 21
)sin(Arc2
fxh
15
Different rules applied to the same underlying process
F1=P[t]-SMA(5)
1.6
1.65
1.7
1.75
1.8
1.85
1.9
1.95
2
14/0
7/20
08
16/0
7/20
08
18/0
7/20
08
20/0
7/20
08
22/0
7/20
08
24/0
7/20
08
26/0
7/20
08
28/0
7/20
08
30/0
7/20
08
01/0
8/20
08
03/0
8/20
08
05/0
8/20
08
07/0
8/20
08
09/0
8/20
08
11/0
8/20
08
13/0
8/20
08
15/0
8/20
08
17/0
8/20
08
19/0
8/20
08
21/0
8/20
08
23/0
8/20
08
25/0
8/20
08
27/0
8/20
08
29/0
8/20
08
31/0
8/20
08
02/0
9/20
08
04/0
9/20
08
-12%
-8%
-4%
0%
4%
8%
12%
16%
20%
P[t] SMA(5) SMA(20)
X=Ln(P[t+1]/P[t])
F2=P[t]-SMA(20)
Gbp[/Usd]
16
Different rules applied to the same underlying process
• Example Trading Gbp/Usd onlySimple moving average of length 5 daysSimple moving average of length 20 days
In that particular case when using past prices only in the forecasting strategies is a known number that does not have to be estimated
)sin(Arc2
fh
f
17
Correlation coefficient between Simple MA*
• [3] shows that the returns generated by moving averages of order m1 and m2 exhibit linear correlation coefficient given by:
* most popular trading rule ?? [9],[11]
For mathematical proofs, see:Acar, E. and Lequeux, P. (1996), " Dynamic Strategies: A Correlation Study ", in C.Dunis (ed), Forecasting Financial Markets, Wiley, London, pp 93-123
)
)1im()1im(
)1im()1im(sin(Arc
22m
0i
22
2m
0i
21
2)m,m(Min
0i21
h21
21
18
Moving averages EquivalenceP r o p o s i t i o n
A n y m e c h a n i c a l s y s t e m t r i g g e r i n g a s e l l s i g n a l f r o m a f i n i t e l i n e a r c o m b i n a t i o n o f p a s t p r i c e s o f t h e f o r m :
s e l l B a Pt j t jj
m
1 00
1
w h e r e m b e i n g a n i n t e g e r l a r g e r t h a n o n e , a n d a j c o n s t a n t s ,
a d m i t s a n ( a l m o s t ) e q u i v a l e n t l i n e a r r e t u r n f o r m u l a t i o n o f t h e f o r m :
s e l l ~B d Xt j t j
j
m
1 00
2
w h e r e X t = L n ( P t / P t - 1 ) , = a jj
m
0
1
, d j =
a ii j
m 2
T h e o n l y r e q u i r e d a s s u m p t i o n i s t h a t r a t e s o f r e t u r n s c a n b e a p p r o x i m a t e d b y t h e i r l o g a r i t h m i c v e r s i o n s .
T h a t i s f o r j = 1 , m - 1 .
)P/P(Ln~P/P1 jtttjt
19
Theoretical Correlation between rule returns
• Equi-correlation between simple MA achieved for2 , 3, 5, 9, 17, 32, 61, 117, 225Close to Fibonacci numbers !2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21, 34, 55, 89, 144, 233
Length 2 3 5 9 17 32 61 117 2252 1 0.70 0.52 0.38 0.27 0.20 0.14 0.10 0.073 1 0.71 0.51 0.37 0.26 0.19 0.14 0.105 1 0.71 0.50 0.36 0.26 0.19 0.139 1 0.70 0.50 0.36 0.26 0.19
17 1 0.71 0.50 0.36 0.2632 1 0.70 0.50 0.3661 1 0.70 0.50117 1 0.70225 1
20
• Does not have to be estimatedThe same relationship between technical indicators across markets
• Even when analytical formulae do not exist proceed to Monte-carlo simulations
• Relationship between two technical indicators applied to the same market should be more or less independent on the market itself when measured by the correlation coefficient
21
Same [technical] rules applied to different underlying process
1.6
1.65
1.7
1.75
1.8
1.85
1.9
1.95
2
14/0
7/20
08
16/0
7/20
08
18/0
7/20
08
20/0
7/20
08
22/0
7/20
08
24/0
7/20
08
26/0
7/20
08
28/0
7/20
08
30/0
7/20
08
01/0
8/20
08
03/0
8/20
08
05/0
8/20
08
07/0
8/20
08
09/0
8/20
08
11/0
8/20
08
13/0
8/20
08
15/0
8/20
08
17/0
8/20
08
19/0
8/20
08
21/0
8/20
08
23/0
8/20
08
25/0
8/20
08
27/0
8/20
08
29/0
8/20
08
31/0
8/20
08
02/0
9/20
08
04/0
9/20
08
-12%
-8%
-4%
0%
4%
8%
12%
16%
20%
P1[t] SMA(20)
X1=Ln(P1[t+1]/P1[t])
F1=P1[t]-SMA(20)
Gbp[/Usd]
22
F2=P2[t]-SMA2(20)
1.25
1.3
1.35
1.4
1.45
1.5
1.55
1.6
14/0
7/20
08
16/0
7/20
08
18/0
7/20
08
20/0
7/20
08
22/0
7/20
08
24/0
7/20
08
26/0
7/20
08
28/0
7/20
08
30/0
7/20
08
01/0
8/20
08
03/0
8/20
08
05/0
8/20
08
07/0
8/20
08
09/0
8/20
08
11/0
8/20
08
13/0
8/20
08
15/0
8/20
08
17/0
8/20
08
19/0
8/20
08
21/0
8/20
08
23/0
8/20
08
25/0
8/20
08
27/0
8/20
08
29/0
8/20
08
31/0
8/20
08
02/0
9/20
08
04/0
9/20
08
-8%
-4%
0%
4%
8%
12%
16%
20%
P2[t] SMA2(20)
X2=Ln(P2[t+1]/P2[t])
Eur[/Usd]
23
Same [technical] rules applied to different underlying process
• Example Trading Gbp/Usd and Eur/Usdusing Simple moving average of length 20 days
Only correlation between markets has to be estimatedThen results independent on the rule itself
)sin(Arc2
xxh
x
24
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Correlation Coefficient between Different Markets
Co
rre
lati
on
Co
eff
icie
nt
be
twe
en
th
e S
am
e S
tra
teg
y A
pp
lie
d t
o D
iffe
ren
t M
ark
ets
Symmetrical Strategy B&H
2) Application to the FX markets
26
• Chf[/Usd] Futures marketsDaily data from 1978 to 2008
• Establishing returns generated by simple moving averages S(5), S(9) and S(225)
• Calculating correlation coefficients betweenS(5) and S(9)S(5) and S(225)
Different [technical] rules applied to the same underlying
process
27
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40
0.50
0.60
0.70
0.80
0.90
1.00M
ay-7
9
May
-80
May
-81
May
-82
May
-83
May
-84
May
-85
May
-86
May
-87
May
-88
May
-89
May
-90
May
-91
May
-92
May
-93
May
-94
May
-95
May
-96
May
-97
May
-98
May
-99
May
-00
May
-01
May
-02
May
-03
May
-04
May
-05
May
-06
May
-07
May
-08
Co
rrel
atio
n C
oef
fici
ent,
On
e Y
ear
(250
day
s) R
oll
ing
Chf/Usd Theoretical
Chf/Usd TheoryCorrel(S(5),S(9)) 0.692 0.705
28
-0.30
-0.20
-0.10
0.00
0.10
0.20
0.30
0.40M
ay-7
9
May
-80
May
-81
May
-82
May
-83
May
-84
May
-85
May
-86
May
-87
May
-88
May
-89
May
-90
May
-91
May
-92
May
-93
May
-94
May
-95
May
-96
May
-97
May
-98
May
-99
May
-00
May
-01
May
-02
May
-03
May
-04
May
-05
May
-06
May
-07
May
-08
Co
rrel
atio
n C
oef
fici
ent,
On
e Y
ear
(250
day
s) R
oll
ing
Chf/Usd Theoretical
Chf/Usd TheoryCorrel(S(5),S(225)) 0.094 0.134
29
Testing equality of correlation
• R empirical correlation coefficient calculated over N observationsR0 theoretical value
• Testing R=R0 requiresTransformation
5% confidence interval set to detect statistically different coefficients
r
rLogz
1
1
2
1
)3N(12z
30
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8M
ay-7
9
May
-80
May
-81
May
-82
May
-83
May
-84
May
-85
May
-86
May
-87
May
-88
May
-89
May
-90
May
-91
May
-92
May
-93
May
-94
May
-95
May
-96
May
-97
May
-98
May
-99
May
-00
May
-01
May
-02
May
-03
May
-04
May
-05
May
-06
May
-07
May
-08
Tran
sfo
rmed
Co
rrel
atio
n
Chf/Usd Theoretical Percentile(97.5%) Percentile(2.5%)
Transformed Correl(S(5),S(9))
31
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5M
ay-7
9
May
-80
May
-81
May
-82
May
-83
May
-84
May
-85
May
-86
May
-87
May
-88
May
-89
May
-90
May
-91
May
-92
May
-93
May
-94
May
-95
May
-96
May
-97
May
-98
May
-99
May
-00
May
-01
May
-02
May
-03
May
-04
May
-05
May
-06
May
-07
May
-08
Tran
sorm
ed C
orr
elat
ion
Chf/Usd Theoretical Percentile(97.5%) Percentile(2.5%)
Transformed Correl(S(5),S(225))
32
Theoretical Correlation• Deviations with empirical values over a year and/or on
specific markets. Yet overall adequation over the long-term and across currency pairs
• Does not require any estimation in the case of different rules applied to the same market- Analytical formula or- Monte-carlo simulations once and for all because- independent on the market itself Sure ???Monthly data across 45 ccy pairs
33
• FX marketsMonthly Spot, Forwards and interest rates data from end of Aug 1982 to end of Aug 2008
• 45 currency pairscrossing USD, EUR (DEM), JPY, CHF, GBP, AUD, CAD, NZD, SEK, NOK
Different rules applied to the same underlying process
34
Correlation between SMA(2) and SMA(3)
0.40
0.45
0.50
0.55
0.60
0.65
0.70
0.75
0.80
0.85
0.90
Usd/E
ur
Usd/J
py
Usd/C
hf
Usd/G
bp
Usd/A
ud
Usd/C
ad
Usd/N
zd
Usd/S
ek
Usd/N
ok
Eur/J
py
Eur/C
hf
Eur/G
bp
Eur/A
ud
Eur/C
ad
Eur/N
zd
Eur/S
ek
Eur/N
ok
Jpy/
Chf
Jpy/
Gbp
Jpy/
Aud
Jpy/
Cad
Jpy/
Nzd
Jpy/
Sek
Jpy/
Nok
Chf/G
bp
Chf/A
ud
Chf/C
ad
Chf/N
zd
Chf/S
ek
Chf/N
ok
Gbp
/Aud
Gbp
/Cad
Gbp
/Nzd
Gbp
/Sek
Gbp
/Nok
Aud/C
ad
Aud/N
zd
Aud/S
ek
Aud/N
ok
Cad/N
zd
Cad/S
ek
Cad/N
ok
Nzd/S
ek
Nzd/N
ok
Sek/N
ok
SMA(2,3) Theory
35
• Monthly strategiesBuying or Selling One month Forward- MomentumIf previous B&H return positive (negative), buy (sell)- CarryIf positive (negative) interest rate differential, buy (sell)
• Under the RW hypothesis, Correlation between Forecasts = 0Therefore Correlation between returns = 0
• See [5] for an application to emerging markets
36
Correlation Momentum, Carry
-0.5
-0.4
-0.3
-0.2
-0.1
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
Usd/E
ur
Usd/Jp
y
Usd/C
hf
Usd/G
bp
Usd/A
ud
Usd/C
ad
Usd/N
zd
Usd/S
ek
Usd/N
ok
Eur/Jp
y
Eur/C
hf
Eur/G
bp
Eur/A
ud
Eur/C
ad
Eur/N
zd
Eur/S
ek
Eur/N
ok
Jpy/C
hf
Jpy/G
bp
Jpy/A
ud
Jpy/C
ad
Jpy/N
zd
Jpy/S
ek
Jpy/N
ok
Chf/G
bp
Chf/A
ud
Chf/C
ad
Chf/N
zd
Chf/S
ek
Chf/N
ok
Gbp/A
ud
Gbp/C
ad
Gbp/N
zd
Gbp/S
ek
Gbp/N
ok
Aud/C
ad
Aud/N
zd
Aud/S
ek
Aud/N
ok
Cad/N
zd
Cad/S
ek
Cad/N
ok
Nzd/S
ek
Nzd/N
ok
Sek/N
ok
-0.8
-0.4
0.0
0.4
Aug-06 Aug-08
2 ye
ars
Co
rrel
atio
n
Usd/Gbp
37
Same rules applied to different underlying process
• Example Trading Usd/Chf and Eur/Jpyusing the same momentum strategy or the same carry methodology
• Same strategy applied to 45 Markets => 990 correlations
PS Analytical formula on valid for momentum rule. Strictly speaking not applicable to carry strategy
38
-1
-0.8
-0.6
-0.4
-0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Correlation Coefficient between Different Markets
Co
rrel
atio
n C
oef
fici
ent
bet
wee
n t
he
Sam
e S
trat
egy
Ap
pli
ed t
o D
iffe
ren
t M
arke
ts
Carry Momentum Theoretical B&H
3) Portfolio Implications
40
• Chf[/Usd] Futures marketsDaily data from 1978 to 2008
• Establishing returns generated by simple moving averages S(32), S(61) and S(117)
• Calculating rolling annualised volatility over the past 250 days for - Buy and Hold, - Individual moving averages 32, 61, 117- Equally weight portfolio of moving averages
Different [technical] rules applied to the same underlying
process
41
• Theory tells usVol of any (+1,-1) strategy = Vol (B&H)Vol (portfolio) = K * Vol (B&H)where K= Function (correlation coefficients)
For portfolio of moving averages 32,61,117K=0.871 See [6]
• Only one estimate required: market’s volatilityIrrespective of the strategy
42
5%
7%
9%
11%
13%
15%
17%
19%
21%M
ay-7
9
May
-80
May
-81
May
-82
May
-83
May
-84
May
-85
May
-86
May
-87
May
-88
May
-89
May
-90
May
-91
May
-92
May
-93
May
-94
May
-95
May
-96
May
-97
May
-98
May
-99
May
-00
May
-01
May
-02
May
-03
May
-04
May
-05
May
-06
May
-07
May
-08
Ro
llin
g A
nn
ual
ised
Vo
lati
lity
0.000
0.125
0.250
0.375
0.500
0.625
0.750
0.875
1.000
Ris
k re
du
ctio
n c
oef
fici
ent
(K)
B&H 32 61 117 Portfolio (32,61,117) K Coefficient Theory
4) Challenges ahead
44
• Reformulating existing strategies as sum of elementary components (1,-1)
• Higher moments (skewness and kurtosis) generated by portfolio of strategies have been quantified ([4])How to incorporate these results in portfolio construction ?
• Isn’t the goal to maximize risk-adjusted returns ?Return expectations will always be subjective.Yet no universal definition of risk. (Stdev, VaR,…)
45
• On the risk side (higher moments), Using theoretical results allow to build an unified framework across strategies and shift the focus on measuring/predicting: - Market volatility - Market correlations
• Enough uncertainties not to use analytical results when available. Freeing time to investigate the primary question: Which strategy makes money and when….?
References1) Acar, E (2004), “Modelling directional hedge funds-mean, variance and
correlation with tracker funds”, in Satchell and Scowcroft eds, Advances in Portfolio Construction and Implementation, Elsevier pp 193-214
2) Acar, E and Middleton, A (2004), "Active Correlations: New Findings and More Challenges", presented at the September EIR Conference in London
3) Acar, E. and Lequeux, P. (1996), " Dynamic Strategies: A Correlation Study ", in C.Dunis (ed), Forecasting Financial Markets, Wiley, London, pp 93-123
4) Acar, E. and S.E. Satchell (2002), “The portfolio distribution of directional strategies”, in Acar and Satchell eds, Advanced Trading Rules, 2d edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, pp 174-182
5) De Zwart, G., Markwat, T., Swinkels, L. and D. van Dijk (2007), “The economic value of fundamental and technical information in emerging currency markets”, ERIM Report Series 2007-096-F&A.
6) Lequeux, P. and E. Acar (1998), “A Dynamic Index for Managed Currencies Funds Using CME Currency Contracts”, European Journal of Finance, 4(4), 311-330
References7) Lukac, L.P., Brorsen B.W. and S.H. Irwin (1988), “Similarity of computer guided
technical trading systems”, Journal of Futures Markets, Vol 8(1), pp 1 – 13
8) Lukac, L.P., Brorsen B.W. and S.H. Irwin (1988), “A test of futures market disequilibrium using twelve different technical trading systems”, Applied Economics, Vol 20(5), pp 623 – 639
9) Maditinos, D.I., Z. Sevic, N.G. Theriou, (2006), “Users' Perceptions and the Use of Fundamental and Technical Analyses in the Athens Stock Exchange: A Second View”, AFFI 2006 International Congress, Finance d'entreprise et finance de marche: quelles complementarites, Poitiers, France, 26-27 June 2006
10) Marshall, B.R, Cahan, R.H. & J.M. Cahan, (2008), “ Can Commodity Futures Be Profitably Traded with Quantitative Market Timing Strategies?”, Journal of Banking and Finance, 32, pp. 1810-1819
11) Menkhoff, L and U. Schmidt, (2005), “The use of trading strategies by fund managers: some first survey evidence”, Applied Economics, Vol 37(15), pp. 1719-1730
12) Shintani, M., Yabu, T., and D. Nagakura (2008), “Spurious Regressions in Technical Trading: Momentum or Contrarian?”, IMES Discussion Paper Series 2008-E-9
Top Related