This blog is about data analytics, statistics, economics, and investment issues. The "Warp" in the title refers to the nonlinear nature of investment instrument variations.
The figures below show the graphs of the 10y-3m Treasury yields and 10y-2y Treasury yields. The inversion in the 10y-3m graph is the best indication of an impending recession, and that graph typically un-inverts immediately prior to a recession.
While the first graph does not show an un-inversion, the second (i.e., 10y-2y) does. And the second tends to predict the first, because the 2y yields tend to predict the 3m yields. That is where the yield curve un-inversion is, at the moment. The video linked below discusses this in a bit more detail.
The figure below illustrates a truth that most investors know, but tend to forget. Taking high levels of risk in the financial markets increases the tail probabilities, which are associated with massive gains and massive losses. The lure of high-risk decisions and related investment instruments often acts as a sort of tax on the statistically illiterate.
But investors can reduce the chances that they will end up at the left tail end of the probability distribution. When it comes to stock investing, paying attention to two events can help. The first is the percentage difference between 10-year and 3-month U.S. Treasury yields falling below zero, because a U.S. recession tends to occur within the next 18 months.
The second is the stock market, measured by an index such as the S&P 500, reaching a double-top within that that period of 18 months after the percentage difference between 10-year and 3-month U.S. Treasury yields falls below zero. This combination is extremely bearish. And this is where we are about now. The video linked below discusses this in a bit more detail.
Let us say that a coincidence involving two events, where one seems to predict the other, happens a number of times. How many times until it can be considered not only a coincidence, but a statistically significant pattern? We propose a framework to answer this question. Using the framework, we find that the number of times required is 7. We illustrate the practical application of our framework in the context of a very important phenomenon: When the percentage difference between 10-year and 3-month U.S. Treasury yields falls below zero, a U.S. recession appears to occur within the next 18 months.
All of this is laid out in much more detail in the article linked below. In this article, we have established the minimum number of times required for the inversion-recession phenomenon to be deemed more than a coincidence, and rather a statistically significant pattern. That number is 7. Therefore, given that since 1970 we have observed 8 instances of the inversion-recession phenomenon, we can conclude that this not a coincidence, and that it is in fact a statistically significant pattern.
