Paper detail

Testing for financial crashes using the Log Periodic Power Law mode

A number of papers claim that a Log Periodic Power Law (LPPL) fitted to financial market bubbles that precede large market falls or 'crashes', contain parameters that are confined within certain ranges. The mechanism that has been claimed as underlying the LPPL, is based on influence percolation and a martingale condition. This paper examines these claims and the robustness of the LPPL for capturing large falls in the Hang Seng stock market index, over a 30-year period, including the current global downturn. We identify 11 crashes on the Hang Seng market over the period 1970 to 2008. The fitted LPPLs have parameter values within the ranges specified post hoc by Johansen and Sornette (2001) for only seven of these crashes. Interestingly, the LPPL fit could have predicted the substantial fall in the Hang Seng index during the recent global downturn. We also find that influence percolation combined with a martingale condition holds for only half of the pre-crash bubbles previously reported. Overall, the mechanism posited as underlying the LPPL does not do so, and the data used to support the fit of the LPPL to bubbles does so only partially.

preprint2013arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.