Round 2: reverting power law and cycle-on-powerlaw tests; one-time holdout run.

Add TrendReversionVol: deviations from the power-law trend follow a daily
AR(1), so uncertainty levels off, optionally plus trend-parameter
uncertainty with an autocorrelation-adjusted effective sample size.

Two experiments, run under the unchanged verdict rule:
- powerlaw-ou: +21% to +45% vs powerlaw at 2-4 years, but slightly negative
  point estimates at 1 month make it inconclusive.
- cycle-on-powerlaw: inconclusive (+18% at 2 years, negative elsewhere).

The holdout (outcomes after 2024-11-26) was scored once, for the four
candidates fixed beforehand. powerlaw is the best long-horizon forecast
(+45% and +58% vs the random walk at 2 and 3 years); nothing beats the
random walk inside a year; cycle fails badly. Results are in the README.
This commit is contained in:
sam
2026-09-24 03:06:21 -07:00
parent b0243adf61
commit 082bcfbbbc
4 changed files with 116 additions and 6 deletions
+42 -2
View File
@@ -6,8 +6,8 @@ import numpy as np
import pandas as pd
from ..data import log_returns
from ..halving import cycle_position
from .drift import mean_by_cycle_day
from ..halving import GENESIS, cycle_position
from .drift import PowerLawDrift, mean_by_cycle_day
@dataclass(frozen=True)
@@ -104,3 +104,43 @@ class CycleVol:
future = history.index[-1] + pd.to_timedelta(np.arange(1, horizons.max() + 1), unit="D")
_, future_day = cycle_position(future)
return base * np.sqrt(np.cumsum(ratio[future_day] ** 2)[horizons - 1])
@dataclass(frozen=True)
class TrendReversionVol:
"""
Uncertainty for a price that reverts to the power-law trend.
Deviations from the trend follow a daily AR(1) with coefficient φ (fitted
by PowerLawDrift), so their variance levels off: after h days it is
σ²(1 − φ^2h) / (1 − φ²), with σ the trailing `window`-day volatility.
With `parameter_uncertainty`, the uncertainty of the fitted trend line is
added. The residuals are so autocorrelated that ~5000 days carry the
information of only n(1 − φ)/(1 + φ) independent points, and the
coefficient covariance is inflated to match.
"""
window: int = 365
parameter_uncertainty: bool = False
def sd(self, history: pd.DataFrame, horizons: np.ndarray) -> np.ndarray:
intercept, slope, phi = PowerLawDrift().fit(history)
phi = min(phi, 0.9999)
sigma = log_returns(history).iloc[-self.window :].std()
variance = sigma**2 * (1 - phi ** (2 * horizons)) / (1 - phi**2)
if self.parameter_uncertainty:
variance = variance + self._trend_variance(history, horizons, intercept, slope, phi)
return np.sqrt(variance)
@staticmethod
def _trend_variance(history, horizons, intercept, slope, phi) -> np.ndarray:
t = (history.index - GENESIS).days.to_numpy()
x = np.column_stack([np.ones(len(t)), np.log(t)])
resid = np.log(history["close"].to_numpy()) - x @ [intercept, slope]
n_eff = len(t) * (1 - phi) / (1 + phi)
cov = resid.var() * np.linalg.inv(x.T @ x) * len(t) / n_eff
# The forecast mean is a(1 − φ^h) + b(ln t_h − φ^h ln t_0) + φ^h ln P_0.
decay = phi**horizons
g = np.column_stack([1 - decay, np.log(t[-1] + horizons) - decay * np.log(t[-1])])
return np.einsum("hi,ij,hj->h", g, cov, g)