I would have thought predictions of market fluctuations without the use of differential equations or other concrete mathematical definitions would be laughed at, in 2016. Wikipedia: Cannot believe that the head of HSBC would pay heed to this technique. C'mon, you saw the potato I posted, you really think it was coincidence that thing looked a dude, man?Elliott wave analysts (or Elliotticians) hold that each individual wave has its own signature or characteristic, which typically reflects the psychology of the moment.[2][3] Understanding those personalities is key to the application of the Wave Principle; they are defined below. (Definitions assume a bull market in equities; the characteristics apply in reverse in bear markets.)
Critics say it is a form of pareidolia.
There are certainly plenty who try using real math, but they run into the limitations that always appear with real math and data: A) Historical data assumes no structural shift (legislation, etc.) outside of the historic range. B) Most tradable things are highly correlated, which has to be accounted for: two similar stock charts are not two independent datasets. Once the correlation is accounted for, even using all global markets gives a fairly small start for large macro forecasts. And people usually prefer an exciting, bold, precise prediction with no grounds at all over a careful mathematical prediction with a full explanation of expedited ranges, significance, and assumptions.I would have thought predictions of market fluctuations without the use of differential equations or other concrete mathematical definitions would be laughed at, in 2016.
All the best equations involve exactly zero people. Well, my favorites, at least.