E-Minis Open For Trading...
...Down 15. It will be a very long night. We expect an emergency announcement from the G-7 before Asia opens.
(3 votes)
»
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
Perhaps TPTB is out of bullets.
They have given up.
Now they have decided to cut off the markets, let them clear, so that the wealthy and super-rich can pick stuff up for bargains in about 6 - 12 months.
If gold goes way up, I will be looking for bargains as well.
Gold down fractionally. Interesting, huh?
Theyll all be in their stocked deep underground bunker cities long before 12 months from now.
Maybe we can put in buried land lines to stay in touch and visit ZH from our bunkers...
Or land mines.
Bargain hunting has already commenced in my neighborhood. Time to start scaling back in. Watch dollar strength like a hawk.
The problems on the other side of the pond are working themselves out. Hopefully the Greek lesson will serve the other peripherals well.
RoboTard: Just when I think you couldn't possibly come up with anything dumber, you post again.
Isn't the real Dick Head a Dr.? Damn counterfeiters...
Could you explain why it is dumb?
Or are you just parroting everyone else who hates this poster because he occasionally believes that US equities may not crater to zero during a global currency devaluation.
I appreciate Robo's contributions. As an old-school poster, the posts are about trading, as opposed to alien abductions, truther, and political battles. Undecided as to whether or not major league cherry picking is going on with regard to the recommendations.
but... didn't it used to be "Robo" trader? and i seem to recall the hot chick pic changing rather regularly.
I do to, I've been reading his posts since the blog days. He definitely used to have his own guest section from time to time, can't recall when the roboT trader switch though.
Anyway it's pretty obvious some people are just peeved because they're losing their pants shorting everything every day and expecting SPY 100 or something and then see him come on here calling for higher prices (and being right more often than not). Traders trade, losers get dogmatic.
Me and Robo go way back.
you've changed a couple times also.
and you would have made a couple bucks buying Robo's AAPL (much as I hate apple and jobs).
It's all about the timing.
I thought it was all about the sale of small, discretionary, home decor items?
I think robo is a douchebag but "even a broken clock is right twice a day"
You are persistent though robo, and for that trait alone, I wish you success.
You have to admit, you are a truly a douche at heart.
What would we do around here without having Robo to bat around, lol
I have watched Robo go from a favored poster to somehow hated, and can't figure it out. I have no problem with Robo's "call it as he sees it" posts. He's usually dead on, but then throws in some sarcastic remark to get his detractors going. You may not agree with every post on ZH, and that's OK. I don't agree with all of his posts, but then again, I figure I may not understand where he's coming from, since he certainly trades. And that means he calls it when markets are going up, and those who are unhappy about the PPT's activity, and other reasons for market manipulation, confuse his call of market direction for sympathy for their manipulations. And let's face it - Armageddon is a notorious no-show in this market.
I agree. He is a trader, it's in his name! Nothing wrong with trading (even if your friendly Bearing-dude tried trading and really sucked at it).
Most of the rest of us are buyers and holders of gold. He does not go out of his way to pick fights, other than a swipe now and then at General Jim (Sinclair). OK, so he was wrong about gold... Good!
ZH is a Fight Club! And I have to say one thing, RobotTrader offered up a monster box of Silver Eagles (at a fair price), and no one took him up on it.
no way.. QE3 is guranteed now. The FED will do what ever is necessary to prevent a deflationary trap. Households & businesses are still deleveraging, so any decrease to revenue, will cause great pain to households, even less consumer activity, and ensure businesses stop investing, which would mean a deflationary death spiral. IF the deflationary trap is triggered, a liquiditry trap will follow, as the FED runs out of policy options. enter reset. enter end of Western civilization. enter halting of Large Hadron Collider. enter Higgs Boson not discovered. enter transactional theory, and many-world interpretation of quantum mechanics, which collapsed the wave function to ensure the Higgs Boson is not discovered in our world.
The LHC is set to increase the energy beams by Christmas. So that's when the null point singularity starts to collapse the wave function to 6 sigma of shock and awe. LHC = man's first improbability drive.
Sounds plausible.
Per http://www.sgxniftydowfutureslive.com/index_files/DOWFUTURES.htm
Gold up about $5.00
Euro around $1.3580
Per http://finviz.com/futures.ashx
Gold up about $3.50
Dow futures down about 130
A couple of knowledgeable people here at the Hedge gave me these two futures sites for insight into what may happen on Mondays.
Thank you to those who shared with me!
Try also, xe.com for currencies. And of course, kitco.com for metals. And don't forget cboe.com for futures.
Thanks!
np
7:04 PM ET
Dow futures down 100
DAX futures down 191! Looks like it is going to be another fun day in Euroland. Our future?
The PTB have two full sessions to deploy the PPT foreign operators.
euro/dollar down but holding steady. /es down but stable.
'We're off the lows'?
there is no spoon
yet there is spooning...
there is no market, there is only the bernank.
But who is spooning who???
We know who Bwaney is spooning. There's an image that will help you loose weight...
Gap down = wait for gap to be filled before re-shorting.
You are right that the gap will be filled. But it doesn't have to happen tonight or tomorrow or this quarter.. that the opening came down to,
There is a thing called a break away gap as well that doesn't have to be filled right away
However, given the channel structure the opening came down to, we've probably seen a bottom for a few more hours
If Down hard tomorrow on spy, then only support lis a long way @ spy 1010.
Good luck with that
Good luck on that one as well.
I suspect 1200 will come before 1010.
I suspect you maybe sharting by tomorrow then! Good luck with No PPT and No QE3! Cat can't bounce without em
and the new mini-pomo schedule doesn't come out until Tuesday.
Announcement: We are the Gee-7 and well golly gee we don't know what the fuck we are doing until we get the latest from ZeroHedge.
gap down *****ez
gap down, with no fill-in.... except for what's in their depends!
Down 15 handles is news? Lol. Well now it's down 11. That isn't even below the Aug lows or the lows made last Tuesday, and this is cause for some worldwide crisis intervention?
Yeah but if it were up 15 handles you would be dancin in the streets....
He'd be mowing the green shoots in his front yard.
Buy the fargin' dip!
Au down $11, Ag down .96 seems to be going the wrong direction if the markets are in bad shape and trending down. BITCHEZ
Lies. Gold is up .50 at 1860, silver down .10 at 41.35. When you choose to lie, make sure others can't call you out on it....
at 1919 gold spot is down $1.6 at 1857 by 1859.1
silve down 0.11 at 41.27 by 41.37
when he posted it was down about 10
Thats a big drop, buy that dip and you will be crushed. Goldman Sachs is rolling with the fear and their BS intervention calls - that no one will make. So them and others will wait for the suckers. then sell. Greece getting kicked out of the EU is now a matter of days, maybe hrs. Huge shock to the system, major liquidation trade ahead. Prepare.
You are right Chump! If there isn't a major announcement from the G-7 before Asia opens, Greece could be toast tonight.
Remember May 6 2010? Get your EUR chart and comapre aganst the S&P and Dow, it was a 'ping pong' sell off. COuld happen again.
Damned if I can see where any bargains might be lurking in a destroyed global economy. Companies have to have a customer base that is willing and able to buy, whether that base is 'consumers' or other companies in a chain, each of which must also have a customer base that is willing and able to buy, and so on. That's the nature of the 'global economy' we have all been conned into believing is stronger than local or national economies. Trouble is that in the global economy there are far more links, and all it takes is for one link at a critical junction to fail and, well, you know the rest. The fewer links, and the more stable the customer base for each company in the chain, the more resiliant. "Bargains" assumes that after the collapse, there will be recovery. But recovery depends upon the existence of a customer base for each link in the chain, which I don't think will exist a few months from now, nor do I think that interlinking customer base will be restored quickly if ever. We may be on the verge of a new paradigm, which some will call a reversion to the Dark Ages, but which others will call the new reality. Globalization has failed, and we simply don't know what will replace it, but I think you can be sure that it will not re-emerge after a few rough months, or years, or decades. C'est la vie; plus ca change, plus la meme chose. Rome did fall, although in slow motion. All other empires have fallen, some very quickly, some taking centuries. I have no idea how fast this one, meaning the global corporate empire, will crumble but it sure looks like it will be one of the faster ones when history is finally written. Of course, then there's the possibility of a madman, a Dr. Strangelove. There are certainly enough psychotics in positions of power to make that happen, once they realize that their fantasies of personal dominion have been shattered forever. If everyone will proceed in an orderly fashion to the exits we may all get out of here alive. Under no circumstances should anyone panic - it is contagious.
this is an honest question. Please, could someone explain to me what ES or E-mini's is ? I've learned a lot on ZEROHEDGE, but, cannot figure this out. I've googled it, tried researching it, but, to no avail. If someone could explain this to me without laughing at me or junking me, i'd sure appreciate learning about it. Thank you !
S&P futures (mini), basically drives all other asset classes due to heavy correlation during volatile times.
ES is the CME group symbol for the mini S&P 500 contract...its value tracks the value of the index...also i junked you...
thank you ! that helps me to understand. i tried learning it on my own, but had trouble understanding. plz remember, i'm still a learner & a novice here in these parts. & it was worth it being junked, at least i got a great explanation !
np...that's a junk
You're junk you rude man.
junked
Sorry you get junked. If you have been reading a site as sophisticated as zerohedge for any length of time would what the E-mini is. Even I know what it is, and I quite trading in 2000. And I'm just a globalist Illuminati head ... in a jar.
Try googling the term " expected shortfall".
Those HFT's are getting greased tonight to make sure no route tomorrow. How many times have we seen nothing but shit data all through the weekend only to watch the market levitate....I know this time it's different. I mean the shit is really hitting the fan. Just sayin', don't be surprised to watch market do fine tomorrow...since it's merely a robot market that no one seems to give a rip about in the real economy anymore.
Seriously, the market can take 8%....but go out in the economy, and everyone will be going about there business completely unaware or unconcerned with it. It's weird, I tell ya.
Actually, I stand corrected. Those HFT's must already be working hard in overseas COMEX trading keeping a price on PM's. I mean, seriously, think about it. DAX CAC FTSE down another 3+% in futures. IMF says NAB will get ramped with 580 billion to save some weak european banks I'm sure. G-7 more of the same: let's print and save the system, errrgh, status quo. You've got Bernak around the corner. Bonfire of the paper currencies....
ALl this happening and yet Gold barely above water (which mean it closes down tomorrow). Yup, definately, HFT's are already humming along in the paper PM's markets...
Must. Not. Tip. Hand.
Must. Not. Tip. Hand.
Must. Bring. PM's. Down.
Those political idiots should let the markets fall. There is nothing that go up for ever besides stincky air.
VAR versus expected shortfall
Original headline: MasterClass
Source: Risk magazine | 01 Mar 2007
Categories: VAR, Risk Management
Topics: Risk South Africa
Value-at-risk is often criticised as not presenting a full picture of the risks a company faces. John Hull explains recent developments in risk management and derivatives pricing, and discusses the limitations of VAR and the relative advantages of an alternative measure, expected shortfall
Value-at-risk is defined as the loss level that will not be exceeded with a certain confidence level during a certain period of time. For example, if a bank's 10-day 99% VAR is $3 million, there is considered to be only a 1% chance that losses will exceed $3 million in 10 days. If we are going to use one measure to describe the risk in a particular situation, is VAR the best choice? One problem with VAR is that, when used in an attempt to limit the risks taken by a trader, it can lead to undesirable results.
Suppose a bank tells a trader that the one-day 99% VAR of the trader's portfolio must be kept at less than $10 million. There is a danger that the trader will construct a portfolio where there is a 99% chance that the daily loss is less than $10 million and a 1% chance that it is $500 million. The trader is satisfying the risk limits imposed by the bank, but is clearly taking unacceptable risks. Most traders would, of course, not behave in this way - but some might.
The problem here is summarised in figures 1 and 2. The figures show the probability distribution for the gain or loss on a portfolio over a specified period of time. Both portfolios have the same VAR. However, the portfolio in figure 2 is much riskier that the portfolio in figure 1 because potential losses are much greater.
Expected shortfall
A measure that produces better incentives for traders than VAR is expected shortfall. This is also sometimes referred to as conditional VAR, or tail loss. Where VAR asks the question 'how bad can things get?', expected shortfall asks 'if things do get bad, what is our expected loss?'.
Expected shortfall, like VAR, is a function of two parameters: N (the time horizon in days) and X% (the confidence level). It is the expected loss during an N-day period, conditional that the loss is greater than the Xth percentile of the loss distribution. For example, with X = 99 and N = 10, the expected shortfall is the average amount that is lost over a 10-day period, assuming that the loss is greater than the 99th percentile of the loss distribution. Clearly, the expected shortfall is much higher in figure 2 than figure 1.
Properties of the risk measures
A risk measure that is used for specifying capital requirements can be thought of as the amount of cash (or capital) that must be added to a position to make its risk acceptable to regulators. Artzner, et al. (1999) have proposed a number of properties that such a risk measure should have. These are:
- Monotonicity: if a portfolio has lower returns than another portfolio for every state of the world, its risk measure should be greater.
- Translation invariance: if we add an amount of cash K to a portfolio, its risk measure should go down by K.
- Homogeneity: changing the size of a portfolio by a factor (lambda) while keeping the relative amounts of different items in the portfolio the same should result in the risk measure being multiplied by (lambda).
- Sub-additivity: the risk measure for two portfolios after they have been merged should be no greater than the sum of their risk measures before they were merged.
The first three conditions are straightforward given that the risk measure is the amount of cash needed to be added to the portfolio to make its risk acceptable. The fourth condition states that diversification helps reduce risks. When two risks are aggregated, the total of the risk measures corresponding to the risks should either decrease or stay the same.
VAR satisfies the first three conditions, but it does not always satisfy the fourth, as will now be illustrated.
Consider two $10 million one-year loans, each of which has a 1.25% chance of defaulting. If a default occurs on one of the loans, the recovery of the loan principal is uncertain, with all recoveries between 0% and 100% being equally likely. If the loan does not default, a profit of $200,000 is made. To simplify matters, we suppose that if one loan defaults it is certain that the other loan will not default.1 For a single loan, the one-year 99% VAR is $2 million. This is because there is a 1.25% chance of a loss occurring and, conditional on a loss, there is an 80% chance that the loss is greater than $2 million. The unconditional probability that the loss is greater than $2 million is 80% of 1.25%, or 1%.
Consider next the portfolio of two loans. Each loan defaults 1.25% of the time and they never default together. There is therefore a 2.5% probability that a default will occur. The VAR in this case turns out to be $5.8 million. This is because there is a 2.5% chance of one of the loans defaulting and, conditional on this event, there is a 40% chance that the loss on the loan that defaults is greater than $6 million. The unconditional probability that the loss on the defaulting loan is greater than $6 million is therefore 40% of 2.5%, or 1%. A profit of $200,000 is made on the other loan, showing that the VAR is $5.8 million.
The total VAR of the loans considered separately is $2 million + $2 million = $4 million. The total VAR after they have been combined in the portfolio is $1.8 million greater, at $5.8 million. This is in spite of the fact that there are very attractive diversification benefits from combining the loans in a single portfolio.
Coherent risk measures
Risk measures satisfying all four of the conditions are referred to as coherent. The example illustrates that VAR is not always coherent. It does not satisfy the sub-additivity condition. This is not just a theoretical issue. Risk managers sometimes find that, when the London portfolio is combined with that of New York to form a single portfolio for risk management purposes, the total VAR goes up rather than down.
In contrast, it can be shown that the expected shortfall measure is coherent. Consider again the earlier example. The VAR for a single loan is $2 million. The expected shortfall from a single loan when the time horizon is one year and the confidence level is 99% is, therefore, the expected loss on the loan, conditional on a loss greater than $2 million. Given that losses are uniformly distributed between zero and $10 million, this is halfway between $2 million and $10 million, or $6 million.
The VAR for a portfolio consisting of the two loans was calculated as $5.8 million. The expected shortfall from the portfolio is, therefore, the expected loss on the portfolio, conditional on the loss being greater than $5.8 million. When a loan defaults, the other (by assumption) does not and outcomes are uniformly distributed between a gain of $200,000 and a loss of $9.8 million. The expected loss, given that we are in the part of the distribution between $5.8 million and $9.8 million, is $7.8 million. This is therefore the expected shortfall on the portfolio. Because $6 million + $6 million > $7.8 million, the expected shortfall does satisfy the sub-additivity condition for the example.
A risk measure can be characterised by the weights it assigns to quantiles of the loss distribution. VAR gives a 100% weighting to the Xth quantile and zero to other quantiles. Expected shortfall gives equal weight to all quantiles greater than the Xth quantile and zero weight to all quantiles below the Xth quantile. We can define what is known as a spectral risk measure by making other assumptions about the weights assigned to quantiles. A general result is that a spectral risk measure is coherent (that is, it satisfies the sub-additivity condition) if the weight assigned to the qth quantile of the loss distribution is a non-decreasing function of q. Expected shortfall satisfies this condition. VAR, however, does not because the weights assigned to quantiles greater than X are less than the weight assigned to the Xth quantile.
Conclusions
Regulators make extensive use of VAR and its importance as a risk measure is therefore unlikely to diminish. However, expected shortfall has a number of advantages over VAR. This has led many financial institutions to use it as a risk measure internally.
This is an edited extract from John Hull's book, Risk Management and Financial Institutions, published by Prentice Hall in 2006. www.rotman.utoronto.ca/(approx)hull John Hull is the Maple professor of derivatives and risk management at the Joseph L Rotman School of Management, University of Toronto.
1. This is to simplify the calculations. If the loans default independently of each other so that two defaults can occur, the numbers are very slightly different, but the VAR of the portfolio is still greater than the sum of the VARs of the individual loans
References
Artzner P, F Delbaen, J-M Eber and D Heath, 1999
Coherent measures of risk
Mathematical Finance 9 (3), pp. 203-228
Hull J, 2006
Risk management and financial institutions
Prentice Hall.
Read more: http://www.risk.net/risk-magazine/technical-paper/1506669/var-versus-expected-shortfall#ixzz1Xhv9CN00
Risk.net - Financial risk management news and analysis. Take a 1 month free trial to Risk now!
Why isn't gold over $1,900 by now? Seems like it should be up big given all the temper tantrums this weekend about Greek BK, etc.
ES and EUR now trying to claw their way back to even. Hardly much of a blip on the Finviz daily chart.
fear of margin hikes and dumping?
Duplicate, sorry
I expect the G-7/IMF to brutally ass fuck all the shorts some time soon with a stick save of Greece. Strauss Kahn was probably practicing for this with that poor hotel maid. Christene LaGuarde will have to use her vibrating horse dick strap on.
that is the best bet - these criminals are relentless and own the presses.
i suspect the markets to tank to 1050 and stick a gun to bernanke's head for more crack...
Stay nimble. Market manipulation is now S.O.P. for the central bankers and mis-timing their moves will tear a hole in your account.
looks like NASDAQ will turn green before opening. Unbelievable.