‘Manna from heaven’: does the presence of central banks make technical analysis profitable?

Smita Roy Trivedi
{"title":"‘Manna from heaven’: does the presence of central banks make technical analysis profitable?","authors":"Smita Roy Trivedi","doi":"10.4337/EJEEP.2020.0072","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Profitability of technical-analysis strategies has been explained with reference to central-bank intervention in markets (Neely 1998; LeBaron 1999; Saacke 2002). I argue that central-bank intervention is a market shock which leads to a generation of trends, making technical analysis profitable. Looking at empirical evidence from the Indian foreign-exchange market, I find returns calculated for the entire period are consistently and substantially higher than when intervention periods are removed. Thirteen out of the 15 strategies demonstrate higher returns with intervention periods included, compared to without intervention periods. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov sample tests show statistically significant differences in the returns between the entire period and the without-intervention period for four strategies, which is confirmed by bootstrap estimation. The paper contributes first by including actual trading strategies in the empirical testing of profitability of technical analysis and second by emphasizing the efficacy of technical analysis rather than the action of the central bank itself in explaining profitability, in a departure from the existing literature.","PeriodicalId":44368,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies-Intervention","volume":"70 1","pages":"1-18"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies-Intervention","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4337/EJEEP.2020.0072","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Profitability of technical-analysis strategies has been explained with reference to central-bank intervention in markets (Neely 1998; LeBaron 1999; Saacke 2002). I argue that central-bank intervention is a market shock which leads to a generation of trends, making technical analysis profitable. Looking at empirical evidence from the Indian foreign-exchange market, I find returns calculated for the entire period are consistently and substantially higher than when intervention periods are removed. Thirteen out of the 15 strategies demonstrate higher returns with intervention periods included, compared to without intervention periods. The Kolmogorov–Smirnov sample tests show statistically significant differences in the returns between the entire period and the without-intervention period for four strategies, which is confirmed by bootstrap estimation. The paper contributes first by including actual trading strategies in the empirical testing of profitability of technical analysis and second by emphasizing the efficacy of technical analysis rather than the action of the central bank itself in explaining profitability, in a departure from the existing literature.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
“天降甘露”:央行的存在会让技术分析有利可图吗?
参考中央银行对市场的干预,技术分析策略的盈利能力得到了解释(Neely 1998;LeBaron 1999;Saacke 2002)。我认为,央行干预是一种市场冲击,它会引发一系列趋势,使技术分析有利可图。从印度外汇市场的经验证据来看,我发现在整个时期内计算出的回报率始终比去除干预期时高得多。在15个策略中,有13个策略与不干预期相比,在干预期表现出更高的回报。Kolmogorov-Smirnov样本检验表明,四种策略在整个周期和不干预期间的收益有统计学意义上的差异,这是由bootstrap估计证实的。本文的贡献首先是将实际交易策略纳入技术分析盈利能力的实证检验,其次是与现有文献不同,强调技术分析的有效性,而不是央行本身在解释盈利能力方面的行动。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Economics and Economic Policies: Intervention (EJEEP) is a peer-reviewed journal which serves as a forum for studies in macroeconomic theory, economic institutions and economic policies. The managing editors aim for productive debates involving one or more variants of heterodox economics, and invite contributions acknowledging the pluralism of research approaches. The submission of both theoretical and empirical work is encouraged. The managing editors contend that a wide variety of institutional and social factors shape economic life and economic processes. Only a careful study and integration of such factors into economics will lead to theoretical progress and to competent economic policy recommendations. This was clearly demonstrated by the inadequacy of orthodox economics, based on neoclassical foundations, to provide suitable explanations and responses to recent financial and economic crises.
期刊最新文献
It takes two to tango: a reply to our MMT critics* 'I think it is important to speak multiple languages theoretically in order to communicate to different types of people' Book review: Cuyvers, Ludo (2022): Neo-Marxism and Post-Keynesian Economics: From Kalecki to Sraffa and Joan Robinson, Milton Park (247 pages, Routledge, hardcover, ISBN 978-1-032-25480-7) Editorial to the Symposium: Modern Monetary Theory and its critics The trade-off between inflation and unemployment in an ‘MMT world’: an open-economy perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1