24 May 2013

Markets: Lack of Change and Changing Value

Each iteration of the Internet has resulted in what remains of the earlier iterations lingering on. What lingers sometimes does not seem to integrate with that is new. Markets also have a similar feature. In fact one can distinguish a new market from the fact that these structures remain, but do not forge ahead.

Can we see anything like this in forex. One might look for it in behavioral effects, that is one could characterize a market phase as having a certain behavior which has changed, with the possibility that fragments of the old market remain. As the old market fragments, can we note this.

One can note that the kind of valuations that are being returned by the market change over time, but unless one feels that these repeat or may repeat, then this may not be a helpful observation. However one may note constants, but the effect of structure may be that how these constants affect returns of value may change.

But what would change the permeability of levels. If a pair has directionality one might expect increased permeability, in effect, but not necessarily of cause, as the directionality may be due to something else, such as a rising, or collapsing equity market. However we could note that permeability may be related to reference, to clumping of valuations over time at that valuation.

We could see the crisis as a washing away of such references, and indeed we have noted this in some pairs. That is, the reference seems necessary for directionality, that is the permeability gives a way for pairs to move. But too much lingering of these fragments of earlier markets, may produce an inelasticity of valuation, that may result in instability (those knots perhaps).

This does not seem to be a problem for the development of the internet, but in markets there is not that kind of intentionality driving things forward. Everything looks the same. One does not say I do not want that pattern of valuation, except in the sense of waiting for a pattern.

In equities one does to an extent, as certain items may not be so prone to value changes, for the time being. However in another sense one does not, as positive outputs from the company will bring it to notice again, assuming any efficiency. We assume thus that there is a life to these items out of the market, that is everything probably does not look the same.

Of course while in forex, one may say, one yearns for the days when Eur/Usd rode up and up, in fact the way the pair values may be more suitable for programs, for example, or certain kinds of trades. That is, it does not look the same, as that which is viewing it may have changed. One may also note that when this pair rode up it retraced at as always unpredictable times.

However all this may suggest the value of fragments for ascribing value to artifacts and a sense of construction of artifacts, but one temporally extended, that is the past is part of the present, and more importantly that which can be valued into the future. That is temporally, it does all look the same.

Thus looking for an asymmetry as one viewing, one could say there is one between forex and equities. One could ask about participation, to what extent is this asymmetrical with viewing. Is that always the same. An intriguing question.

I would suggest that ideally these should be symmetrical. Thus one may tend to approach the forex market as a participant in less changing ways over time than the equity market, but that change is dependent on views which lengthen to investing time frames.

That is, here the temporal effect is to enhance change over time, there is a granularity to structure in time. We are saying there is no such granularity in forex. It also may be seen as growth, which can be seen as effacing past structure, versus forex growth which may simply tighten past structure. There may be a relaxation and tightening over time.

In fact we may be witnessing a relaxation now. Assuming that the market is still functional, viewed over time. One could view perhaps this relaxation as part of maintenance of its functionality. That is, while to do this, the equity market may need to massively retrace and wash away structure, the forex market may rather need to relax to preserve structure.

Can one ask of past structure can be made to work in the present, I would suggest that it may be that it can work in the future. That is its time comes again. In forex one might say its time is always now, that is there is an appearance of structure. Is it possible to emulate this.

Well, if one sees forex as being a vast network of partly referenced intentionality, all those elements which create a value for a pair for a moment, with weak predictability, one might say that to emulate this, one deconstructs and then re-constructs, without destroying underlying order and considers not whether it will do what one wants now.

Underlying order may in some cases be to do with connection, which is something that could be intentionally preserved. It is more like a free market in a wide sense provides a freedom for all sorts of things to be enabled to happen, including or especially, the unlikely, possibly where it makes sense for them to happen.