Cost-Benefit Analysis of Looking outside the Scope of Trend
A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Looking outside the Scope of Trend:
To Peek or Not to Peek
“The trend is your friend until the end when it bends.” - Ed Seykota
Trend analysis lies at the core of technical analysis. Modern technical analysis derived from Dow Theory. In turn, Dow Theory emphasized the nature and importance of trends and their constituent parts and degrees. Many may recall Dow’s analogy of different trend degrees: the tide (primary trend), waves (secondary trend), and ripples on the waves (minor / short-term trend).
Technical analysis includes many other concepts within its scope. But within technical analysis broadly, the primary focus remains the trend structure. Before considering trends, it may help to discuss the distinction broadly between technical analysis and fundamental analysis.
A. Technical Analysis versus Fundamental Analysis
Top traders and market experts have taken each side in the debate over whether technical or fundamental analysis has the greatest efficacy. Some have straddled the line, preferring a combination of the two.
Some consider technical analysis to be not only superior but also relatively straightforward and efficient compared to other types of analysis, such as fundamental analysis or positioning analysis.FN1 Positioning analysis is beyond the scope of this post and is briefly explained in the first footnote.
Jim Rogers, a famous investor who managed a reportedly very successful fund with George Soros in the 1970s, and who had had many accurate forecasts, expressed strong disdain for technical analysis—he once told Jack Schwager, “I haven’t met a rich technician.” But some of the greatest traders and market experts stand on the other side of this debate. For example, Ed Seykota is a trader of great renown included in Schwager’s 1993 Market Wizards: Interviews with Top Traders. Seykota chose the technical-analysis camp, giving the most weight to trends, chart patterns and good entries and exits. He once described markets in a way that evokes Charles Dow’s wave analogy:
If you want to know everything about the market, go to the beach. Push and pull your hands with the waves. Some are bigger waves, some are smaller. But if you try to push the wave out when its coming in, it’ll never happen. The market is always right.
A former portfolio manager for Fidelity Management who founded several other research and investment firms, David Lundgren, described how he came to follow the principles of technical analysis even though he still expressed great value for fundamental analysis. From an interview included in a 2021 Technical Analysis of Stocks and Commodities magazine, Lundgren shared some of his experiences and insights on this topic. In his view, fundamentals can matter significantly over the long term especially as to stocks.
But Lundgren’s most outstanding remarks in this interview distinguished between these two conceptual approaches to financial markets. He aptly characterized fundamental analysis as being based on the view that the “market is wrong.” In other words, the valuations drawn from a publicly traded company’s financial statements (e.g., P/E ratio, enterprise value, book value) assume the market is “overestimating or underestimating value” and that the price should be above / below the current market price.
By contrast, he said technical analysis assumes the contrary view that the market is actually right in its current price and price trend. The critical distinction between technical analysis and fundamental analysis boils down to ego, according to Lundgren, because pure technical analysis “accepts the verdict of the market” whereas pure fundamental analysis “involves hundreds of hours developing an opinion of what is attractive and often [conflicts] with the verdict of the market.”
Much ink has and will be spilled on whether price discounts everything, and if so, how fast and efficiently (Charles Dow Theory). In any case, fundamental, technical and positioning modes of analysis are not mutually exclusive.
B. Whether to Consider Data outside the Confines of Trend
Since last year’s October 2022 lows in the S&P 500 (SPX) and other major US indices, the current equity market uptrend has been challenging and bewildering to many investors, traders and analysts. It has been especially difficult to comprehend for those who are keenly aware of the broader financial and macroeconomic environment, which includes purportedly tight monetary policy and quantitative tightening (reducing Treasury securities off the Fed’s balance sheet) as well as stubborn core inflation. Such an environment broadly speaking remains unfavorable to equities for the most part.FN2
But trends do not always move in the most sensible direction, and they do not always align consistently with the macroeconomic evidence. Sentiment or even positioning, discussed briefly in the first footnote, can affect the trend even when it may run counter to the macroeconomic evidence.
And trends can stretch into an overbought or oversold condition longer than anyone expects, a principle captured by the old aphorism, attributed to John Maynard Keynes, that “markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.” Exhaustion doesn’t require a 180-degree turn but often appears more like a process, especially at market tops given the long-only nature of most equity capital.
Pure trend followers, who supposedly consider only the technical trend-based evidence, may not care whether the trend makes sense. Indeed, they place their stops and align their trades / investments in accordance with one of many trend-based strategies. And this narrowed focus may be very helpful and exceedingly profitable at times. A recent example is the Nasdaq 100 (QQQ), or even some large or mega-cap tech names like AAPL, MSFT, META, and NVDA. These indices and securities could have rewarded narrowly focused trend-followers quite well on daily and weekly time frames over the past eight months, especially if discipline was used to enter positions at major uptrend supports with stops moved to breakeven or higher along the way. Such trend traders and investors may be busily counting their profits rather than being distracted with inverted yield curves and FOMC policy statements.
The question becomes whether one may look outside the trend (or technical analysis generally). This issue likely generates pages of academic argument and hours of financial media debates between experts. And it may be something for all traders to ponder for a bit.
Given how much of an influence positioning has developed on equity markets over time, as well as central-bank quantitative tightening or quantitative easing, it seems important to consider data from such sources. Such data may also include trend information that affects trends in everything else. For example, trends in the price of commodities may tell us about inflation and likelihood of tighter monetary policy / interest rate hikes by a central bank. And trends in the money supply may strengthen or weaken the case for a current trend in equities.
C. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Looking beyond the Trend
In this author’s view, it is not necessarily foolish or improper to sneak a peek or a long thoughtful gaze, outside a rigid trend-based framework. As with everything in life and trading, costs and benefits must be weighed.
The biggest drawback to going outside the confines of trend is the tendency of many traders to try to consider far too much. Our brains are only capable of processing so much at a given time. Focusing on too much data can cause dilute confidence, weaken resolve, and obfuscate trends. In addition, by the time a trader considers a macroeconomic data point, computerized systems likely have informed all the largest institutional players, or even algorithmic or high-frequency traders, who acted on it before you even had a chance to review its implications. And the market’s reaction to non-technical data points is not always intuitive.
But if one can manage understanding additional data outside the trend/price framework, one might find benefit in learning and following data on yield curves, bond-market dynamics, Fed Funds rates, macroeconomic data, inflationary measures, and volatility gauges can inform one’s outlook in useful ways. The key here is to avoid repeatedly (and blindly) fighting the trend in price—even if one fights that trend with some of the most rational, reasonable and persuasive arguments based on overwhelming macroeconomic, volatility, sentiment, positioning, or other such evidence as to why price should be going the opposite way. In short, this is the important general rule for trend-based systems—make the trend your friend until the end when it bends.FN3
D. Practical Application and Hypotheticals
Just because one should make friends with the trend does not warrant chasing extended trends (see FN3), unless the trader or investor has developed particular expertise in momentum trading, and even then, caution is greatly warranted. Every trend has its proper entries for the time frame involved. Uptrends necessarily require countertrend retracements to support whether defined as an anchored VWAP, key moving average, Fibonacci retracement, upward trendline, or standard-deviation based measures such as linear regression or Bollinger Bands. Technically, this is not peeking outside the trend, but rather it merely considers evidence of trend exhaustion and the likelihood of mean reversion.
Further, a trend-based framework should in fact include considering higher time frame trends such as a monthly chart where each price bar represents one month of price data. One of this author’s collaborators, spy_master, has performed some excellent trend-based analysis on timeframes as high as monthly, quarterly (even yearly bars at times).
It is quite common, moreover, for higher-degree trends to move in the opposite direction as lower-degree trends, such as during a monthly or quarterly uptrend experiencing a corrective retracement to trend support that lasts for days or weeks. Or the hourly trend can move against the daily / weekly trend, frequently does so whenever a countertrend retracement to trend support occurs. Can one technically “fight the trend” merely by preferring a higher degree time-frame trend when it conflicts with a shorter one? The answer depends on one’s time frame, risk tolerance, position size, and rationale.
In addition, trends involving a particular stock, index, or other security can be evaluated based on their relative strength, i.e., as a ratio of the subject stock, index or security to another stock, index, security or data series. The S&P 500 can be compared to the Nasdaq 100 or 10-year Treasures. Or
ETHUSD can be charted as a ratio to another cryptocurrency. This author would argue that such metrics can provide useful trend-based insights even though they incorporate data that is technically beyond the scope of trend. Below are a couple such relative-strength charts that arguably fall within trend-analysis despite relying on data that would normally be considered outside of a price trend's scope:
Example 1 shows this author's relative strength chart of
AAPL to 
XAUUSD (Gold). This is a very long-term chart showing the outperformance trend in AAPL over two decades to the precious medal and commodity Gold.
Example 2 shows spy_master's relative-strength chart of
NVDA, the AI-tech stock into which everyone's distant relatives are now inquiring after its meteoric rise from 2022 bear-market depths. The chart is a relative-strength chart of the ratio of NVDA to the 10-Year Treasury note, which aptly shows how overvalued NVDA is relative to a risk-free asset. It appears far too extended above the risk-free asset in terms of standard deviation on a linear regression-based model shown here. (Note that yields and bonds move inversely, so where an asset outperforms a risk-free bond, it means that the asset is extended given the level of yields produced by that bond.)
Credit: SPY_Master (used with permission)
To conclude, consider the following hypothetical scenarios as a thought experiment. Assume a stock has a monthly or quarterly chart that is extended multiple deviations above the mean (or multiple deviations as a ratio of its price to the money supply). NVDA presents a good case study for these concepts.
Should either scenario be deemed fighting the trend? Is either scenario ill-advised use of capital? Any answers are welcome in the comments provided respectful towards others.
FN1 This footnote helps explain some basics of fundamental and positioning analysis. Beyond this brief explanation, this article will defer to other educational experts for a more thorough explanation of these three modes of financial analysis.
FN2 Yet the central-bank and US Treasury actions behind the scenes may have masked, or even partially or wholly offset, tight Fed interest rate and monetary policy at times during the first half of 2023. For example, many financial publications and analysts discussed the US Treasury’s accounting maneuvers intended to prolong its borrowing authority in light of the debt-ceiling standoff. Commentary also noted that such maneuvering, draining the TGA account (the US Treasury’s “checking account” held at the Federal Reserve), injected money / liquidity into the financial system, which likely muted Fed’s efforts to tighten policy in the short-term while those actions were ongoing.
FN3 But as is often the case with a general rule, the exceptions can dilute the rule somewhat. One prominent exception is mean-reversion analysis / trading systems. In addition, some traders and institutions are trend-reversal traders—a high risk, high reward type approach that requires immaculate risk management, timing, precision and patience, often scaling into and out of massive positions that cannot be acquired or unloaded in a period of days.
To Peek or Not to Peek
“The trend is your friend until the end when it bends.” - Ed Seykota
Trend analysis lies at the core of technical analysis. Modern technical analysis derived from Dow Theory. In turn, Dow Theory emphasized the nature and importance of trends and their constituent parts and degrees. Many may recall Dow’s analogy of different trend degrees: the tide (primary trend), waves (secondary trend), and ripples on the waves (minor / short-term trend).
Technical analysis includes many other concepts within its scope. But within technical analysis broadly, the primary focus remains the trend structure. Before considering trends, it may help to discuss the distinction broadly between technical analysis and fundamental analysis.
A. Technical Analysis versus Fundamental Analysis
Top traders and market experts have taken each side in the debate over whether technical or fundamental analysis has the greatest efficacy. Some have straddled the line, preferring a combination of the two.
Some consider technical analysis to be not only superior but also relatively straightforward and efficient compared to other types of analysis, such as fundamental analysis or positioning analysis.FN1 Positioning analysis is beyond the scope of this post and is briefly explained in the first footnote.
Jim Rogers, a famous investor who managed a reportedly very successful fund with George Soros in the 1970s, and who had had many accurate forecasts, expressed strong disdain for technical analysis—he once told Jack Schwager, “I haven’t met a rich technician.” But some of the greatest traders and market experts stand on the other side of this debate. For example, Ed Seykota is a trader of great renown included in Schwager’s 1993 Market Wizards: Interviews with Top Traders. Seykota chose the technical-analysis camp, giving the most weight to trends, chart patterns and good entries and exits. He once described markets in a way that evokes Charles Dow’s wave analogy:
If you want to know everything about the market, go to the beach. Push and pull your hands with the waves. Some are bigger waves, some are smaller. But if you try to push the wave out when its coming in, it’ll never happen. The market is always right.
A former portfolio manager for Fidelity Management who founded several other research and investment firms, David Lundgren, described how he came to follow the principles of technical analysis even though he still expressed great value for fundamental analysis. From an interview included in a 2021 Technical Analysis of Stocks and Commodities magazine, Lundgren shared some of his experiences and insights on this topic. In his view, fundamentals can matter significantly over the long term especially as to stocks.
But Lundgren’s most outstanding remarks in this interview distinguished between these two conceptual approaches to financial markets. He aptly characterized fundamental analysis as being based on the view that the “market is wrong.” In other words, the valuations drawn from a publicly traded company’s financial statements (e.g., P/E ratio, enterprise value, book value) assume the market is “overestimating or underestimating value” and that the price should be above / below the current market price.
By contrast, he said technical analysis assumes the contrary view that the market is actually right in its current price and price trend. The critical distinction between technical analysis and fundamental analysis boils down to ego, according to Lundgren, because pure technical analysis “accepts the verdict of the market” whereas pure fundamental analysis “involves hundreds of hours developing an opinion of what is attractive and often [conflicts] with the verdict of the market.”
Much ink has and will be spilled on whether price discounts everything, and if so, how fast and efficiently (Charles Dow Theory). In any case, fundamental, technical and positioning modes of analysis are not mutually exclusive.
B. Whether to Consider Data outside the Confines of Trend
Since last year’s October 2022 lows in the S&P 500 (SPX) and other major US indices, the current equity market uptrend has been challenging and bewildering to many investors, traders and analysts. It has been especially difficult to comprehend for those who are keenly aware of the broader financial and macroeconomic environment, which includes purportedly tight monetary policy and quantitative tightening (reducing Treasury securities off the Fed’s balance sheet) as well as stubborn core inflation. Such an environment broadly speaking remains unfavorable to equities for the most part.FN2
But trends do not always move in the most sensible direction, and they do not always align consistently with the macroeconomic evidence. Sentiment or even positioning, discussed briefly in the first footnote, can affect the trend even when it may run counter to the macroeconomic evidence.
And trends can stretch into an overbought or oversold condition longer than anyone expects, a principle captured by the old aphorism, attributed to John Maynard Keynes, that “markets can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.” Exhaustion doesn’t require a 180-degree turn but often appears more like a process, especially at market tops given the long-only nature of most equity capital.
Pure trend followers, who supposedly consider only the technical trend-based evidence, may not care whether the trend makes sense. Indeed, they place their stops and align their trades / investments in accordance with one of many trend-based strategies. And this narrowed focus may be very helpful and exceedingly profitable at times. A recent example is the Nasdaq 100 (QQQ), or even some large or mega-cap tech names like AAPL, MSFT, META, and NVDA. These indices and securities could have rewarded narrowly focused trend-followers quite well on daily and weekly time frames over the past eight months, especially if discipline was used to enter positions at major uptrend supports with stops moved to breakeven or higher along the way. Such trend traders and investors may be busily counting their profits rather than being distracted with inverted yield curves and FOMC policy statements.
The question becomes whether one may look outside the trend (or technical analysis generally). This issue likely generates pages of academic argument and hours of financial media debates between experts. And it may be something for all traders to ponder for a bit.
Given how much of an influence positioning has developed on equity markets over time, as well as central-bank quantitative tightening or quantitative easing, it seems important to consider data from such sources. Such data may also include trend information that affects trends in everything else. For example, trends in the price of commodities may tell us about inflation and likelihood of tighter monetary policy / interest rate hikes by a central bank. And trends in the money supply may strengthen or weaken the case for a current trend in equities.
C. Cost-Benefit Analysis of Looking beyond the Trend
In this author’s view, it is not necessarily foolish or improper to sneak a peek or a long thoughtful gaze, outside a rigid trend-based framework. As with everything in life and trading, costs and benefits must be weighed.
The biggest drawback to going outside the confines of trend is the tendency of many traders to try to consider far too much. Our brains are only capable of processing so much at a given time. Focusing on too much data can cause dilute confidence, weaken resolve, and obfuscate trends. In addition, by the time a trader considers a macroeconomic data point, computerized systems likely have informed all the largest institutional players, or even algorithmic or high-frequency traders, who acted on it before you even had a chance to review its implications. And the market’s reaction to non-technical data points is not always intuitive.
But if one can manage understanding additional data outside the trend/price framework, one might find benefit in learning and following data on yield curves, bond-market dynamics, Fed Funds rates, macroeconomic data, inflationary measures, and volatility gauges can inform one’s outlook in useful ways. The key here is to avoid repeatedly (and blindly) fighting the trend in price—even if one fights that trend with some of the most rational, reasonable and persuasive arguments based on overwhelming macroeconomic, volatility, sentiment, positioning, or other such evidence as to why price should be going the opposite way. In short, this is the important general rule for trend-based systems—make the trend your friend until the end when it bends.FN3
D. Practical Application and Hypotheticals
Just because one should make friends with the trend does not warrant chasing extended trends (see FN3), unless the trader or investor has developed particular expertise in momentum trading, and even then, caution is greatly warranted. Every trend has its proper entries for the time frame involved. Uptrends necessarily require countertrend retracements to support whether defined as an anchored VWAP, key moving average, Fibonacci retracement, upward trendline, or standard-deviation based measures such as linear regression or Bollinger Bands. Technically, this is not peeking outside the trend, but rather it merely considers evidence of trend exhaustion and the likelihood of mean reversion.
Further, a trend-based framework should in fact include considering higher time frame trends such as a monthly chart where each price bar represents one month of price data. One of this author’s collaborators, spy_master, has performed some excellent trend-based analysis on timeframes as high as monthly, quarterly (even yearly bars at times).
It is quite common, moreover, for higher-degree trends to move in the opposite direction as lower-degree trends, such as during a monthly or quarterly uptrend experiencing a corrective retracement to trend support that lasts for days or weeks. Or the hourly trend can move against the daily / weekly trend, frequently does so whenever a countertrend retracement to trend support occurs. Can one technically “fight the trend” merely by preferring a higher degree time-frame trend when it conflicts with a shorter one? The answer depends on one’s time frame, risk tolerance, position size, and rationale.
In addition, trends involving a particular stock, index, or other security can be evaluated based on their relative strength, i.e., as a ratio of the subject stock, index or security to another stock, index, security or data series. The S&P 500 can be compared to the Nasdaq 100 or 10-year Treasures. Or
ETHUSD can be charted as a ratio to another cryptocurrency. This author would argue that such metrics can provide useful trend-based insights even though they incorporate data that is technically beyond the scope of trend. Below are a couple such relative-strength charts that arguably fall within trend-analysis despite relying on data that would normally be considered outside of a price trend's scope:Example 1 shows this author's relative strength chart of
AAPL to XAUUSD (Gold). This is a very long-term chart showing the outperformance trend in AAPL over two decades to the precious medal and commodity Gold. Example 2 shows spy_master's relative-strength chart of
NVDA, the AI-tech stock into which everyone's distant relatives are now inquiring after its meteoric rise from 2022 bear-market depths. The chart is a relative-strength chart of the ratio of NVDA to the 10-Year Treasury note, which aptly shows how overvalued NVDA is relative to a risk-free asset. It appears far too extended above the risk-free asset in terms of standard deviation on a linear regression-based model shown here. (Note that yields and bonds move inversely, so where an asset outperforms a risk-free bond, it means that the asset is extended given the level of yields produced by that bond.)Credit: SPY_Master (used with permission)
To conclude, consider the following hypothetical scenarios as a thought experiment. Assume a stock has a monthly or quarterly chart that is extended multiple deviations above the mean (or multiple deviations as a ratio of its price to the money supply). NVDA presents a good case study for these concepts.
- Scenario A: A person entered the position at $290 and took profits on this stock at $405, preferring to exercise caution and avoid this stock as a long-term investment.
- Scenario B: A hedge fund with a 150-page report of deep research on NVDA and the macroeconomic backdrop has a 10-year time horizon and begins scaling into a short position to anticipate a mean reversion at the higher degrees of trend (monthly, quarterly time frames). The hedge fund will add one quarter at $450, another quarter position at $500, and the final two quarters between $500 and $600 if reached.
Should either scenario be deemed fighting the trend? Is either scenario ill-advised use of capital? Any answers are welcome in the comments provided respectful towards others.
FN1 This footnote helps explain some basics of fundamental and positioning analysis. Beyond this brief explanation, this article will defer to other educational experts for a more thorough explanation of these three modes of financial analysis.
- Fundamental analysis for equity indices like
SPX or 
NDX considers macroeconomic data and metrics that focus on an economy’s growth (e.g., GDP), price-stability / inflation (CPI, PCE, PPI), consumption, real estate, money supply, central-bank rate policies, central-bank QE or QT, trade deficits, and more. Fundamental analysis as to individual stocks involves the use of financial data such as revenue, earnings per share, cost of goods sold, capital expenditures, and other data available from a public company’s certified financial statements, as well as financial ratios relying on such data, e.g., earnings per share (EPS), price-to-earnings (P/E) ratios, price-to-sales ratios (P/S) and liquidity ratios (current ratio). In the US and other major economies, securities rules mandate that companies file full disclosure of their financial health, certified by CEOs and CFOs, in annual reports (10-K and quarterly reports (10-Q) on an ongoing basis. - Positioning analysis looks at a complex array of data that covers institutional market positioning and order flows for stocks, options, indices, commodities and futures. It also looks at increasingly important dealer hedging flows (volume and open interest) in options markets and the effect of implied volatility and time on such flows. It can include such insights as net positioning on each side of a given futures market or index by hedgers and speculators. This is an area where expert commentary is helpful to learn even the basics.
FN2 Yet the central-bank and US Treasury actions behind the scenes may have masked, or even partially or wholly offset, tight Fed interest rate and monetary policy at times during the first half of 2023. For example, many financial publications and analysts discussed the US Treasury’s accounting maneuvers intended to prolong its borrowing authority in light of the debt-ceiling standoff. Commentary also noted that such maneuvering, draining the TGA account (the US Treasury’s “checking account” held at the Federal Reserve), injected money / liquidity into the financial system, which likely muted Fed’s efforts to tighten policy in the short-term while those actions were ongoing.
FN3 But as is often the case with a general rule, the exceptions can dilute the rule somewhat. One prominent exception is mean-reversion analysis / trading systems. In addition, some traders and institutions are trend-reversal traders—a high risk, high reward type approach that requires immaculate risk management, timing, precision and patience, often scaling into and out of massive positions that cannot be acquired or unloaded in a period of days.
SquishTrade
関連の投稿
免責事項
これらの情報および投稿は、TradingViewが提供または保証する金融、投資、取引、またはその他の種類のアドバイスや推奨を意図したものではなく、またそのようなものでもありません。詳しくは利用規約をご覧ください。