Jump to content

Welcome to the new Traders Laboratory! Please bear with us as we finish the migration over the next few days. If you find any issues, want to leave feedback, get in touch with us, or offer suggestions please post to the Support forum here.

  • Welcome Guests

    Welcome. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest which does not give you access to all the great features at Traders Laboratory such as interacting with members, access to all forums, downloading attachments, and eligibility to win free giveaways. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free. Create a FREE Traders Laboratory account here.

RichardCox

Benoit Mandelbrot's Contributions to Price Analysis

Recommended Posts

Before his death, Benoit Mandelbrot was one of the most celebrated mathematicians in the world, and most of his work was based on the belief that the wider view of price behavior in financial markets is primitive and in need of large revisions. Mandelbrot's work sought to update these “medieval” views of market behavior so that economists could update the ways asset price changes are understood on a fundamental level. Mandelbrot's legacy as one of the main contributors to the field of technical analysis is firmly established but there are still some traders that view Mandelbrot's work as being disconnected from the real workings of asset markets.

 

Here, we will look at some of Mandelbrot's main contributions to the study of price behavior. The work started roughly 50 years ago and involved the creation of a new type of mathematics. Rather than focusing on accounting or simple geometry, Mandelbrot equations dealt with mathematical shapes rough and complex, rather than smooth and simplistic. Additionally, the pattern repetition that Mandelbrot found was largely uncommon and unexpected relative to most of the similarly focused work that had come before him.

 

Mandelbrot's equations would later be referred to as Fractals and the wider applications for these equations have been seen in environments that are far-removed from the world of finance (being used to describe clouds and coastal formations, to forecast the ways rocks and metals will wear over time, and to generate computer graphics programs.

 

Mandelbrot’s Approach to Finance Markets

 

Focusing on how Mandelbrot's work relates to a financial context, specific examples can be seen in the ways Mandelbrot criticized a large majority of his colleagues attempted to predict the changes in price activity. Mandelbrot’s initial assertions were that market participants should be looking to describe market behavior before attempting to forecast or predict it. While this might sound disappointing to some looking for the “holy grail” of price forecasting, for Mandelbrot, this was an essential step in the process because accurate predictions would be impossible without first having accurate descriptions of what exactly is happening in market environments.

 

Mandelbrot’s Critiques of Prevailing Ideas

 

Since Mandelbrot largely disagreed with most of the price forecasting approaches around him,it should be noted that Mandelbrot's main contention was with the idea that price activity is determined by dual opposing positions (the decision to either push prices higher, or to drive them lower). This idea he saw as an overly simplistic view of market activity, reducing asset valuations to nothing more than the toss of a coin: Heads, markets buy and push prices higher, Tails, markets sell and drive prices lower. Before Mandelbrot, this idea reigned as an explanation of how prices remain generally supported: Buyers and Sellers constantly bump into each other and keep prices suspended with real valuation changes occurring slowly.

 

Mandelbrot argued, however, that this view does not adequately account for the occurrence of major swings in market volatility. Imagine a stock that falls from $50 to 5 cents. Surely, for Mandelbrot, these suspension ideas (and the binary Coin Toss view) contain some inefficiencies and cannot be relied upon to forecast all possible price outcomes. According to Mandelbrot, large increases in price activity should never happen when viewing markets in a binary, suspension fashion. But, of course, we know that these situations occur all the time and Mandelbrot main focus was to explain why this is the case.

 

Changing the Prevailing Approach

 

One of Mandelbrot’s suggestions was to modify the binary (Coin Toss) suspension model to that the equations matched the real world occurrences. When looking at the financial markets, this modification meant applying Fractals because of the ways they can plot and describe the rough and seemingly unlevel nature of price activity. Uneven changes in price activity (or any observable environment) will make it difficult to formulate equations, and for Mandelbrot, this is the reason simple geometry proved insufficient when describing these environments.

 

This is the reason Mandelbrot’s work with Fractal geometry became a primary focus. With this form of mathematics, he felt he could write equations that mirrored market behavior but he still found himself confronting problems with the ability to forecast future price behavior (especially in cases where major swings in price were seen). While many of Mandelbrot’s critics agreed with the idea that traditional statistics were insufficient when looking to forecast wild variations in price, some contended that when looking at longer time frames the market actually does smooth out in ways less rough than Mandelbrot was suggesting. This debate led many to favor Mandelbrot’s models over short time frames, while preferring to use more traditional models as durational periods are extended.

 

Theories Gauging Market Performance

 

In his 1982 book The Fractal Geometry of Nature, Mandelbrot looked more broadly, attempting to find evidence continual reappearance of fractals within the universe, and this is the work that ultimately granted him the notoriety he would later receive. The appearance of Fractals in many of the patterns we encounter in daily life (in clouds, plants, geographical formations), can be described by Mandelbrot’s mathematics. This gained him attention from practitioners of Chaos Theory and computer graphics visionaries and both of these fields would later draw largely from Mandelbrot’s Fractals equations.

Mandelbrot’s equations for price forecasting evolved later in his life.

 

The changing approach to price analysis allowed for new ways to measuring market performance, and in modeling the drastic price swings with a greater level of precision. Mandelbrot's formulas are now viewed as a means for measuring and assessing the broader climate seen in the market over a given period. For Mandelbrot’s theories, consequences must be tested a large number of times and show high levels of accuracy in order to be applicable to asset trading.

 

Mandelbrot's central contention is that Coin Tossing approaches are overly simplistic and almost suggest that the trading outcome of one day is equal to those seen on every other day. Anyone with any real experience in the markets knows that this just isn’t the case. Trading with Mandelbrot’s theories typically involves looking at the number of price changes and then isolating the number of important trading days to small intervals. For Mandelbrot, it is this significant minority that is the important period, and the other trading days can be avoided altogether - as the ability to forecast movements is less likely to result in substantial gains.

 

A Summary of Mandelbrot’s Fractals

 

Benoit Mandelbrot’s Fractal theory has been studied for decades and is based on the idea that financial markets (and science as a whole) is based on our sensations. Most of these sensations are commonly understood: When we see something, we recognize this as the sensation of optics. When we hear something, we recognize this as the sensation of acoustics. When temperatures rise, we develop theories to explain the sensation of heat. For Mandelbrot, one of the most fundamental sensations can be described as “roughness.”

 

Imagine primitive man agitated by roughness in the same way that humans become agitated by heat. Roughness was difficult for primitive man to overcome, and this, for Mandelbrot required the use of Fractal geometry to remedy. Mandelbrot argues that the ability to measure the non-basic sensations (such as Roughness) came relatively recently. These advances came with ability to make accurate physical measurements, as we essentially turn sensations into abstract numbers and equations. The patterns that mark Fractals repeat in a similar fashion, and with this repetition Mandelbrot suggests that we can gain an accurate description of “rough” and irregular constructions - like a cloud formation, coastline, plant structure - or the financial markets. For Mandelbrot, it is this description that is the first step to efficient price forecasting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read Mandelbrots " The Misbehavior of Markets" and enjoyed it, but I did not necessarily agree with or understand it fully. Could you take a moment to visually show me what Mandelbrots fractal theory would inspire in a trade setup. I would love to see how you would produce that on a chart.

 

Regards

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I read Mandelbrots " The Misbehavior of Markets" and enjoyed it, but I did not necessarily agree with or understand it fully. Could you take a moment to visually show me what Mandelbrots fractal theory would inspire in a trade setup. I would love to see how you would produce that on a chart.

 

Regards

 

Hello,

 

Mandelbrot's fractal theory might cause you to assess probabilities using power laws of exponentiation rather than assuming a Gaussian distribution of outcomes (as one would expect flipping a coin as the article describes). You would price an Option completely differently to the prevalent Merton-Scholes model, for instance. You wouldn't rely on linear regression methods and concepts like GARCH. You would anticipate the occurrence of 'outliers' with far greater frequency than that predicted by a bell curve approach. And you wouldn't work with an artificially imposed two sigma threshold such as that imposed by Bollinger Bands.

 

Hope that helps.

 

BlueHorseshoe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great Thread Richard!

 

I look forward to the link

 

Happy to see some posters on TL tackle markets from an academic point of view rather than the junk thats promoted/misconstrued in regards to technical analysis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Thx for reminding us... I don't bang that drum often enough anymore Another part for consideration is who that money initially went to...
    • TDUP ThredUp stock, watch for a top of range breakout above 2.94 at https://stockconsultant.com/?TDUP
    • How long does it take to receive HFM's withdrawal via Skrill? less than 24H?
    • My wife Robin just wanted some groceries.   Simple enough.   She parked the car for fifteen minutes, and returned to find a huge scratch on the side.   Someone keyed her car.   To be clear, this isn’t just any car.   It’s a Cybertruck—Elon Musk's stainless-steel spaceship on wheels. She bought it back in 2021, before Musk became everyone's favorite villain or savior.   Someone saw it parked in a grocery lot and felt compelled to carve their hatred directly into the metal.   That's what happens when you stand out.   Nobody keys a beige minivan.   When you're polarizing, you're impossible to ignore. But the irony is: the more attention something has, the harder it is to find the truth about it.   What’s Elon Musk really thinking? What are his plans? What will happen with DOGE? Is he deserving of all of this adoration and hate? Hard to say.   Ideas work the same way.   Take tariffs, for example.   Tariffs have become the Cybertrucks of economic policy. People either love them or hate them. Even if they don’t understand what they are and how they work. (Most don’t.)   That’s why, in my latest podcast (link below), I wanted to explore the “in-between” truth about tariffs.   And like Cybertrucks, I guess my thoughts on tariffs are polarizing.   Greg Gutfield mentioned me on Fox News. Harvard professors hate me now. (I wonder if they also key Cybertrucks?)   But before I show you what I think about tariffs… I have to mention something.   We’re Headed to Austin, Texas This weekend, my team and I are headed to Austin. By now, you should probably know why.   Yes, SXSW is happening. But my team and I are doing something I think is even better.   We’re putting on a FREE event on “Tech’s Turning Point.”   AI, quantum, biotech, crypto, and more—it’s all on the table.   Just now, we posted a special webpage with the agenda.   Click here to check it out and add it to your calendar.   The Truth About Tariffs People love to panic about tariffs causing inflation.   They wave around the ghost of the Smoot-Hawley Tariff from the Great Depression like it’s Exhibit A proving tariffs equal economic collapse.   But let me pop this myth:   Tariffs don’t cause inflation. And no, I'm not crazy (despite what angry professors from Harvard or Stanford might tweet at me).   Here's the deal.   Inflation isn’t when just a couple of things become pricier. It’s when your entire shopping basket—eggs, shirts, Netflix subscriptions, bananas, everything—starts costing more because your money’s worth less.   Inflation means your dollars aren’t stretching as far as they used to.   Take the 1800s.   For nearly a century, 97% of America’s revenue came from tariffs. Income tax? Didn’t exist. And guess what inflation was? Basically zero. Maybe 1% a year.   The economy was booming, and tariffs funded nearly everything. So, why do people suddenly think tariffs cause inflation today?   Tariffs are taxes on imports, yes, but prices are set by supply and demand—not tariffs.   Let me give you a simple example.   Imagine fancy potato chips from Canada cost $10, and a 20% tariff pushes that to $12. Everyone panics—prices rose! Inflation!   Nope.   If I only have $100 to spend and the price of my favorite chips goes up, I either stop buying chips or I buy, say, fewer newspapers.   If everyone stops buying newspapers because they’re overspending on chips, newspapers lower their prices or go out of business.   Overall spending stays the same, and inflation doesn’t budge.   Three quick scenarios:   We buy pricier chips, but fewer other things: Inflation unchanged. Manufacturers shift to the U.S. to avoid tariffs: Inflation unchanged (and more jobs here). We stop buying fancy chips: Prices drop again. Inflation? Still unchanged. The only thing that actually causes inflation is printing money.   Between 2020 and 2022 alone, 40% of all money ever created in history appeared overnight.   That’s why inflation shot up afterward—not because of tariffs.   Back to tariffs today.   Still No Inflation Unlike the infamous Smoot-Hawley blanket tariff (imagine Oprah handing out tariffs: "You get a tariff, and you get a tariff!"), today's tariffs are strategic.   Trump slapped tariffs on chips from Taiwan because we shouldn’t rely on a single foreign supplier for vital tech components—especially if that supplier might get invaded.   Now Taiwan Semiconductor is investing $100 billion in American manufacturing.   Strategic win, no inflation.   Then there’s Canada and Mexico—our friendly neighbors with weirdly huge tariffs on things like milk and butter (299% tariff on butter—really, Canada?).   Trump’s not blanketing everything with tariffs; he’s pressuring trade partners to lower theirs.   If they do, everybody wins. If they don’t, well, then we have a strategic trade chess game—but still no inflation.   In short, tariffs are about strategy, security, and fairness—not inflation.   Yes, blanket tariffs from the Great Depression era were dumb. Obviously. Today's targeted tariffs? Smart.   Listen to the whole podcast to hear why I think this.   And by the way, if you see a Cybertruck, don’t key it. Robin doesn’t care about your politics; she just likes her weird truck.   Maybe read a good book, relax, and leave cars alone.   (And yes, nobody keys Volkswagens, even though they were basically created by Hitler. Strange world we live in.) Source: https://altucherconfidential.com/posts/the-truth-about-tariffs-busting-the-inflation-myth    Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/       
    • No, not if you are comparing apples to apples. What we call “poor” is obviously a pretty high bar but if you’re talking about like a total homeless shambling skexie in like San Fran then, no. The U.S.A. in not particularly kind to you. It is not an abuse so much as it is a sad relatively minor consequence of our optimism and industriousness.   What you consider rich changes with circumstances obviously. If you are genuinely poor in the U.S.A., you experience a quirky hodgepodge of unhelpful and/or abstract extreme lavishnesses while also being alienated from your social support network. It’s about the same as being a refugee. For a fraction of the ‘kindness’ available to you in non bio-available form, you could have simply stayed closer to your people and been MUCH better off.   It’s just a quirk of how we run the place and our values; we are more worried about interfering with people’s liberty and natural inclination to do for themselves than we are about no bums left behind. It is a slightly hurtful position and we know it; we are just scared to death of socialism cancer and we’re willing to put our money where our mouth is.   So, if you’re a bum; you got 5G, the ER will spend like $1,000,000 on you over a hangnail but then kick you out as soon as you’re “stabilized”, the logistics are surpremely efficient, you have total unchecked freedom of speech, real-estate, motels, and jobs are all natural healthy markets in perfect competition, you got compulsory three ‘R’’s, your military owns the sky, sea, space, night, information-space, and has the best hairdos, you can fill out paper and get all the stuff up to and including a Ph.D. Pretty much everything a very generous, eager, flawless go-getter with five minutes to spare would think you might need.   It’s worse. Our whole society is competitive and we do NOT value or make any kumbaya exception. The last kumbaya types we had werr the Shakers and they literally went extinct. Pueblo peoples are still around but they kind of don’t count since they were here before us. So basically, if you’re poor in the U.S.A., you are automatically a loser and a deadbeat too. You will be treated as such by anybody not specifically either paid to deal with you or shysters selling bejesus, Amway, and drugs. Plus, it ain’t safe out there. Not everybody uses muhfreedoms to lift their truck, people be thugging and bums are very vulnerable here. The history of a large mobile workforce means nobody has a village to go home to. Source: https://askdaddy.quora.com/Are-the-poor-people-in-the-United-States-the-richest-poor-people-in-the-world-6   Profits from free accurate cryptos signals: https://www.predictmag.com/ 
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.