Sunday, March 1, 2009

Scientific Frontiers and Technical Analysis

Kevin P. Hanley, CMT

Abstract


Are there scientific foundations to Technical Analysis (TA) or is it a pseudo-science? Academia, embracing the Random Walk Theory, the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) and Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) has argued the latter for some 20 years or more. In fact, according to current orthodoxy, both TA and Fundamental Analysis are fruitless distractions and cannot add value. The advent of Behavioral Science has illuminated some of the flaws in the standard model. Andrew W. Lo’s Adaptive Markets Hypothesis reconciles efficient markets with human behavior by taking an evolutionary perspective. According to Lo, markets are driven by competition, adaptation, and natural selection. What is missing is a more accurate and comprehensive model of the market itself. Chaos and Complex system theories provide a more comprehensive understanding of market behavior. The markets can be seen as chaotic, complex, self-organizing, evolving and adaptive, driven by human behavior and psychology. Patterns in the market are emergent properties. Identifying these patterns has predictive value, but certainties must be left behind; only probabilities remain. TA, shown to be the inductive science of financial markets, is an essential tool for identifying these emergent properties and analyzing their probabilities. Lastly, so that the science of TA may advance, the field must distinguish between scientific, empirically based, market analysis theory and the categories of interpretation and practical trading strategies.

No comments: