My Photo
Note: Jeff does not accept guest blog posts on A Dash of Insight.

For inquiries regarding advertising and republication, contact

Follow Jeff on Twitter!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


  • Seeking Alpha
    Seeking Alpha Certified
  • AllTopSites
    Alltop, all the top stories
  • iStockAnalyst
Talk Markets
Forexpros Contributor
Copyright 2005-2014
All Rights Reserved

« Investors Should Be Politically Agnostic | Main | ETF Update: The Independence of Agriculture »

May 29, 2009



I'm just wondering why the use of Modern Portfolio Theory as an indicator at all? It seems like the math behind MPT doesn't cover the actual movement of prices in markets, ie. Gaussian math doesn't match actual financial prices, resulting in a very flawed model.


I've noticed that another Seeking Alpha writer, Dr. Kris from MIT has developed a really interesting item called the SMC puts together Modern Portfolio Theory and several market timing oscillators - seems she prefers the CCI - in regard to properly allocating assets. Looks like an innovative and new way to allocate, and puts 'buy and hold' to bed for good it seems. Are you familiar with it?

I've been involved in markets for many years and fund managers have never shown that they can effectively time the markets. Maybe they should take a look at it, since this seems to be hard math and there is no 'human' element to louse the results.... Your thoughts on it?


Are you aware of an economic indicator that compares the pay rates of lost jobs vs. the pay rates of new jobs? This might be a better measure of future consumer spending than the job numbers alone.


I can't think of a single reason why continuing claims are important. Not only can you not compare a period to historical periods, but they are lagging as an indicator. Initial claims rise first before recessions and they turn down first coming out of a recession.


It seems they are following some bloggers, but maybe not the ONE you want them to...

The comments to this entry are closed.