If Spitznagel's thesis is correct that the frequency and magnitude of
tail events increases with overvaluation, investors need to exercise caution given the extreme level of the equity q ratio.
Not exact matches
If a similar mean is employed, then the
increase in 2 - sigma
events on the one
tail will exceed the decrease in 2 - sigma
events on the opposing
tail.
Imagine, say, a bell - shaped curve based on the null hypothesis that climate change is not happening (and not having an impact on
increasing extreme weather
events), and there is this really long
tail out to infinity; and supposing we get an off - the - charts category 7 hurricane in January, we still can not attribute it or its extra intensity or unusual seasonality to climate change, even if there is only a one in kazillion chance it might occur without climate change having an effect — that is, it is way out there in the very tiny
tail of this null hypothesis curve that fades out into infinity — the
tail that says, afterall, anything's possible.
This is how I understand it (correct me if I am wrong): It's like with
increasing GHGs in the atmosphere the dice are
increasing loaded for such record - breaking
events, but under the null hypothesis (that
increasing GHGs have no effect) there is this very long long
tail of possibility.
An
increase in
tail events might might arise from a change in the mean (asymmetric between the
tails) or a change in the variance (symmetric between the
tails).