hantu CRA$H …

AUGUST 23, 2010, 2:01 PM ET
Yes Folks, Hindenburg Omen Tripped Again
The Hindenburg Omen reared its ugly head late last week, signaling more doom and gloom as stocks plod along amid the dog days of summer.

The Omen, a technical indicator which uses a plethora of data to foreshadow a stock-market crash, was tripped again on Friday, marking the second time since Aug. 12 it has occurred. (It also came close on Thursday, but one of its criteria fell short.)

The latest trigger has prompted the Omen’s creator, Jim Miekka, to exit the market. “I’m taking it seriously and I’m fully out of the market now,” Miekka, a blind mathematician, said in a telephone interview from his home in Surry, Maine. “I would’ve probably stayed in until the beginning of September,” depending on how the indicators varied. “That was my basic plan, until the Hindenburg came along.”

The Omen has been behind every market crash since 1987, but significant stock-market declines have followed only 25% of the time. So there’s a high likelihood that the Omen could be nothing more than a false signal.

But that isn’t stopping Miekka from taking any chances, especially as September, typically the market’s worst-performing month, sits only one week away.

“It’s sort of like a funnel cloud,” he said. “It doesn’t mean it’s going to crash, but it’s a high probability. You don’t get a tornado without a funnel cloud.” He added he’s not currently shorting anything, although he may look to short Nasdaq stock index futures in the next few weeks, “depending on how the technicals go.”

Despite the ominous forecast, there are some glimmers of hope. Miekka doesn’t expect to sit on the sidelines for very long. In fact, Miekka, who is an avid target shooter despite being blind, is looking at put volumes and various moving averages that will offer clues of when he will start buying again.

“With what we have now, I think it’s possible we could get a 20% decline going into the fall,” Miekka said. “But I would expect some type of selloff and be buying at a lower price.”

(Tomi Kilgore contributed to this post)
Hindenburg Omen

… hantu Hindenburg merupakan indikator teknikal saat pasar bullish mencapai PUNCAKnya dan mulai berangsur-angsur turun …

The Hindenburg Omen is a technical indicator that can give you a heads up when a bulls market is likely to peak and start heading lower. This indicator was named after the famous Hindenburg disaster of May 1937 a German airship had a terrible crash.

There are many different indicators it looks at in order to predict the top, but the main indicator is the 52 week high and 52 week lows in the NYSE.
If the 52 week highs and 52 week lows both account for over 2.2% of the total stocks in the market it is an indicator that there is a lot of indecision in the market and it could turn around at any time.
… kondisi yang dicerminkan oleh sejumlah saham yang sudah mencapai HARGA TERTINGGI dalam 52 minggu terakhir dan sejumlah saham yang sudah mencapai HARGA TERENDAH dalam 52 minggu terakhir, total mencakup 2,2 % daripada semua saham, serta ditandai oleh KETIDAKPASTIAN yang tinggi… maka akan terjadi CRASH/anjlok harga saham setelahnya …

The 5 exact signals that you need to see for it to be considered a Hindenburg omen are.

1. The daily number of NYSE 52 week highs and 52 week lows are both over 2.2%

2. The Smaller of these numbers is over 75

3. The NYSE 10 week moving average is going up.

4. The number of 52 week highs is not over twice as much as the number of 52 week lows.

That is the formula, but how reliable is it? It has been able to predict every stock market crash successfully since 1985, which should say something about how accurate it can be. But that does not mean it is without flaws. Over that same time period it has generated many false signals of doom.

It should be taken as nothing more than a warning of what might come. If all 5 signs are pointing to a crash then you might want to tighten up your stops just in case, but exiting a position that is still going up because of this signal is not always a wise thing to do. After all if it is a false signal or if it does take a while for it to kick in you could miss a substantial move by exiting early.

MARCH 28, 2011, 10:45 AM ET
Hindenburg Omen: Yep, it was a Dud.
Article
Comments (1)
MARKETBEAT HOME PAGE »
EmailPrint

+ More
Text
By Matt Phillips

Everett
The Hindenburg bursting into flames at the mooring mast at Lakehurst, N.J.
This is why Barry Ritholtz is one of our favorite bloggers. He revisits things to see how headline-grabbing calls by market pundits panned out. In a post Saturday, he goes back to the Hindenburg Omen, a technical indicator that was thought to possibly foreshadow stock market crashes, that got a ton of attention a few months back. (Including here on MarketBeat.)

If you shorted markets due to the Hindenburg Omen back on August 26 seven months ago, you have now lost about 25% of your money as of yesterday’s close — almost 30% as of the pre-quake peak in February.

And if you were festooned with QIDs, and SDS (like some recent accounts that have come into the office), over the same period those positions are down 44% or so. Ouch.

The problems with the Hindenburg omen is not that we have too small a data set (as some have suggested); rather it is a bad statistical indicator with a poor track record.

Our resident Hindenburg Omen expert Steve Russolillo of Dow Jones Newswires is going to try to punch up a post later on today to add a bit more to the conversation. But for now, it’s probably best to remember what The Journal’s Jason Zweig wrote about market prognostications back in January:

First and foremost, the future is the realm of surprises; no one, no matter how expert, can reliably foresee what will happen and how people will react to it. As the economist Friedrich von Hayek said in his lecture “The Pretence of Knowledge” when he won the 1974 Nobel prize in economics, “in the study of such complex phenomena as the market, which depend on the actions of many individuals, all the circumstances which will determine the outcome of a process . . . will hardly ever be fully known or measurable.”