junglebeast
Jun13-09, 10:57 AM
A random walk can be defined by the following recurrence relation,
X_{t+1} = X_t + \Delta X
where \Delta X \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \sigma^2).
At any time t1 \geq 0 a strategist may enter, and at any time t2 > t1 a strategist may exit. The resulting profit p is given by:
p(t1,t2) = X_{t2} - X_{t1}.
Because each recursive step is IID, a sequence of n steps may equivalently be written as
X_{t+n} = X_t + Y
where Y \sim \mathcal{N}(0, n \sigma^2).
Thus, the expected value for profit if you buy at any t1 and sell at t2+n (for any n) is zero,
E(p(t1, t2)) = E(Y + X_t - X_t) = E(Y) = 0
A strategy is a method for choosing t1 and t2 without future knowledge. For example, a strategy could be:
t1 = 0
if t > 0 and: X_t > X_{t1} + 50 or X_t < X_{t1} - 100 then t2 = t
I do not know how to calculate the expected value of that strategy but I think it is zero.
Conjecture:
There is no strategy for entering and exiting that has a non-zero expected value for profit.
Now this seems like an intuitively obvious statement -- but can it be proven mathematically?
X_{t+1} = X_t + \Delta X
where \Delta X \sim \mathcal{N}(0, \sigma^2).
At any time t1 \geq 0 a strategist may enter, and at any time t2 > t1 a strategist may exit. The resulting profit p is given by:
p(t1,t2) = X_{t2} - X_{t1}.
Because each recursive step is IID, a sequence of n steps may equivalently be written as
X_{t+n} = X_t + Y
where Y \sim \mathcal{N}(0, n \sigma^2).
Thus, the expected value for profit if you buy at any t1 and sell at t2+n (for any n) is zero,
E(p(t1, t2)) = E(Y + X_t - X_t) = E(Y) = 0
A strategy is a method for choosing t1 and t2 without future knowledge. For example, a strategy could be:
t1 = 0
if t > 0 and: X_t > X_{t1} + 50 or X_t < X_{t1} - 100 then t2 = t
I do not know how to calculate the expected value of that strategy but I think it is zero.
Conjecture:
There is no strategy for entering and exiting that has a non-zero expected value for profit.
Now this seems like an intuitively obvious statement -- but can it be proven mathematically?