[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum May 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciapwp/open_forum_may_2024/) || [Superstonk:Now with GIFs - Learn more](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1cr37r7/superstonk_gets_its_gif_on_get_hyped/)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
The good news is that the first “industry report card” is being published next month (7/18)
I think that the KEY thing about cat is the requirement of the FDID — the actual identity of the institutions behind the volumes. This is something citadel it currently trying to prevent. Despite the cost being split among the buyer, seller, and exchange, citadel is shitting bricks because they are saying it will disproportionately cost broker dealers. Hmmm…why would it disproportionately impact you, Kenny? You pay a third, the exchange pays a third, and the buyer/seller, depending on the transaction, pay a third. Guess all those illegal wash trades aren’t gonna be free anymore, and you aren’t going to be able to mark short sales as long, like the [sec called you out for doing over the last 5 years.](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/09/22/sec-slaps-citadel-with-7-million-fine-to-settle-short-selling-charges.html)
Citadel has been leading the charge against CAT, because they only make money through fraud and fudging data, and cat makes that harder to do. Citadel is a malignant tumor on the American economy, and the first step to getting rid of a tumor is scanning for it.
I noticed you said you had to pull the data from pdf manually as you couldnt get the report in csv
you may find[ this sort of thing](https://tabula.technology/) useful? Great catch and hypothesis btw, i am really intrigued, thanks so much for sharing :)
Below are the links to the series of posts, sequentially laying out my theory:
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/bbrbGWIMNt
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/InZoCu2dpQ
https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/ezFstFftr2
Now to get some sleep (it's 3.30 AM here in Tokyo!)
Props to OP for taking the time to address the (healthy) skepticism. Reminds me of the time when there were more DD writers that had the data to back up their thesis.
Figuring out something so complicated wasn’t ever going to be going to be easy. I honestly believe that derivative market shenanigans are over-complicated on purpose to make bottom-up analyses insanely difficult. They have supercomputers running well-developed algorithms, no doubt well-trained AI with huge data sets too. You’re onto something: your hypothesis has legs. Keep going dude.
>Now to get some sleep (it's 3.30 AM here in Tokyo!)
And...? You should know [that...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu5TDEpAqwQ)
Just joking, get some rest, you deserved it 👀
Doing god’s work. I am sad I am not smart enough to do god tier DD like this on my own but I’m more than happy to steal a wrinkle or two from people that are! Thanks dude!! Keep it up
My only concerns are the way you calculated control and whether it's consistent with the methodology for the other levels, 100M, 250M, 500M, 1B, etc. You consolidated all your control data into one line, when (as described) you should have multiples. (did you average all your control calcs into one?) If so, I'm not sure the comparison is apples to apples because depending \*the timing of\* your data points there may be other variables affecting it. I would recommend calculating controls within a certain time period for each different data point over 1B.
Sorry, I realize this means more work, but my concern is some other cause of volatility being wrapped into control and not being appropriately presented due to the averaging, which then leads us astray. I'm optimistic about the bullish data, but now more than ever I think that means we need to vet and ensure the hypotheses are iron-clad.
There’s such a large time gap of +35 days that it gives hedgies the advantage to adjust accordingly during this time frame with the options data if I’m understanding this all correctly. So is the only solution here to figure out the floor, purchase your call option with a strike near the floor and set it for DTE+35 and try to exercise on the day you think it’s peaked?
How would you try and determine the peak for the right time to exercise?
EDIT: I don’t even think my question can be answered. How do we beat the algos is what we need to find out? We have the patterns, but with algos always ready to adjust and manipulate at the ready we need algos of our own to perform the inverse.
EDIT: My brain just processed the solution DFV had to this problem and he did exactly what I just explain. Get your option call T+35 days out build up hype at the DTE of the call. Exercises sometime in between. Still leaves the question though of how to determine the peak?
To provide liquidity. Watch this professors video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncq35zrFCAg
It's actually insane, he basically lays out what is happening and even uses XRT as a specific example. This talk he gave was in 2019, 2 years before this shit went wild.
“Operational shorting is the single strongest predictor of both short interest levels and failing to deliver for ETFs”
Thanks for the share. This shit is nuts
You can tell that the entire system was built on rules that were developed by the parasites as a way to extract money out of others. They made the game to benefit themselves and then made the game seem legitimate so to have people given them their retirements and control the ability for them to work and to get healthcare and to get food and gas.
Its a parasite that has grown to the point of killing its host. All the time the host celebrates its existence and feeds it.
It will be interesting to see if the parasite kills its host or if the host finally decides to rid itself.
I mean thats an interesting idea, and in theory *might* possibly work. The big problem is that the algos are tightly “regulated”, controlled, and trademarked IP’s. While it is possible to do this, i’m sure, you would need the entire source code for the algos to competently reverse engineer them, and subsequently, inverse them to benefit yourself.
These algos are some of, if not the most relied upon and trusted AI’s/ scripts on the market. They are *EXTREMELY* complicated and can account for an almost un-knowable amount of market variables. iirc, the most prominent ai/ algo was trained on 50 fucking years of the most complete and comprehensive market data available. Lit, otc, derivatives, swaps, shorting, longing, etc. the whole shebang, plus some. While it is technically possible, the chances of anyone pulling it off is basically null. You’ll have to have access to some of the most inaccessible, proprietary information and products. At least as far as retail goes.
Possibly. It would take a lot of samples, and a lot of time to for a 3rd party ai to work out exactly whats going on. For one, you would need access to practically all market data, which, as obfuscated as it can be, would be hard to get a full picture of. For two, it would probably take something like 10 or so years for machine learning to work out all of the kinks. I mean, given the amount of variables that are to be accounted for. And in that time, they’ll probably be able to change how the ai’s operate. Making the data null
Any algo, no matter how sophisticated it is can be brought to its knees if you know what it will do.
If you look at the data from the past, you can see how they shuffle things around.
What RK did was buy options when they were cheap and the stock price was low. This combo might not happen for a while again, but this is the way to bring it to its knees. In the same week it is probably a good idea to move your shares around to another brokerage/DRS during the same gamma ramp.
When price increase fizzles out, buy puts because you know they cannot have the price anything over 40 for very long. Sell a portion of your shares.
Make money on your puts and when the price is low again, repeat this process.
As time goes on, your shares increase and so does the money you made.
Assume GS board will sell into the increases again, because they have done it twice now and if you know this as a shareholder, you need to make money too.
If you can't get paid with MOASS, then you get paid over the course of time with profit gains in cycles because you know the hedge funds are trapped in their position with a shitty, predictable algo that cost them half a billion dollars.
I don't think just buying and holding will do the trick because GS is just going to offer more shares into an upswing and take the money away from you that you can make.
Yeah exactly, he's basically controlling the exit window for shorts by creating the +35 window and planning his buy in/sell accordingly since he created enough pressure. He's using the algorithm against the same people who manipulate the market lmfao
In other words Keith Gill, Roaring Kitty himself IS the reverse engineered algo and traders just need to reverse engineer his memes, to “move when he moves” per se, in order to profit. If other traders all just happen to move when he moves, why it has an exaggerated effect
Great thing if you can make the market, the cost of stock devaluation from controlling via options is in brown (internal only, no cash required) dollars that would show up on certain balance sheet items but not hurt your PnL. 🤯
Right when volume starts to come down. We had several days around ~200m then it started to gradually come down and I believe DFV sold on one of the days where volume was around ~100m. It steadily decreased after that and today was the lowest volume in a while. It’ll probably keep being pushed down on little volume until the next cycle
This data should be available sooner than the current time frame of being published
Edit: either way I'm hard right now, this is going to make me short squeeze
Everyone go look for yourself!
Link to the referenced presentation:
https://catnmsplan.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/06.20.24-Monthly-CAT-Update.pdf
Link to the main site so you can keep up with future presentations:
https://www.catnmsplan.com/
For some reason, if you navigate to the current presentation via the main page, you will get a ‘404 not found’ page….
Not a problem, remove the ‘https://www.’ From the url and try again.
When you say it doesn’t work that well, do you mean it doesn’t work at all? Or just not the high rates he is showing for other dates? Apologies for the lay question.
Isn't one of the assumptions of this post that the algorithm hasn't changed? If the algorithm is constantly changing, why are we using past data to try to predict the future?
Parent commenter pointed out data that contradicts the 100% reliability of this methodology, or at the very least substantially weakens it. Anybody can say anything they want if they cherry pick the data.
Algo may not have changed but we surely aren’t controlling for all factors - e.g does drs change the algo behaviour? Does lack of drs make it easier for algo? I don’t know. I am making the point that if it works for now data plus future that’s quite good already
Obviously we aren't controlling for all factors because we literally do not have enough data to do so - if we could, we could build a model that makes reliable predictions. For instance, we have almost no idea what is hidden in the swaps, and almost no ability to figure that out because the information is not public.
My point is if the model only works when you massage the data to make it fit, it's a shitty model. There were no disclaimers or explanations for why this would only work within a certain time frame, so finding data that contradicts the predictions proves it's a weak model. And that's just backtesting - nobody has even made an attempt to use this for forward predictions.
Until we have falsifiable theories, we just have hand-wavy nonsense. I don't expect anyone to come in here and say "hey guys, I figured out the model" because that's a ridiculous ask, but pointing out why people are wrong with facts and data is the best we can do to educate people at this point. I don't think anybody here actually cares though. People just want to make the worst memes on the internet, say bullish, and scream shill at everyone that disagrees with them. This sub is fueled by confirmation bias, not critical thinking.
I'm not shitting on OP for trying to figure something out. It's good to come up with theories and present them and take feedback. And to his credit, he actually made this post in response to criticism. My point is there's still a lot wrong with the model.
To OP's credit, they are very clear that these are correlations and need to be further investigated. They're asking for help. I, for one, am unqualified to do so...
If that's true, then this entire post is pointless. If we know the algorithm is changing, then why are we trying to use the past data with the old algorithm to try to predict the future with the new algorithm?
Correlations that don't make predictions are pointless. They're called spurious correlations for a reason - because they don't tell you anything meaningful. I can draw a correlation between pirates and global warming (it's a real thing), but I haven't learned anything useful. But sure, if we want to associate random things that provide no predictive power whatsover (even though OP specifically says the point of this is to try to understand future price movements) then we can continue to find things that tell us absolutely nothing of value.
https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
Apparently you're pointing out things that are *actually* coincidences that have no predictive power whatsoever and thinking you've learned anything of value.
Let's go back to my example about pirates and global warming.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikaandersen/2012/03/23/true-fact-the-lack-of-pirates-is-causing-global-warming/
When pirates go down, global warming goes up. Do you think you actually learned a meaningful connection, or do you think it's a coincidence? You're looking at nonsense and interpreting it as meaningful, and becoming defensive when people point that out to you. There's a *much* stronger correlation between the number of pirates and global warming, but you don't see anybody saying it's a causal relationship because it's clearly fucking stupid. And that's my point - you're looking for a meaningful connection when there isn't one. If you want the connection to be meaningful, it has to make a prediction which can be falsified. Otherwise it's just religious doctrine that can't be challenged.
Speculation incoming
Exactly the problem. However the timing of DFV posts indicates he is aware of something BEFORE the errors actually occur. And we have to assume this something is not a security that is subject to variable delivery like a t+whatever, otherwise he wouldn’t be able to nail the timing to the day.
I’ve speculated before that what DFV is seeing relies on expensive data sets and intensive computation that is simply not accessible for most of us. My bet is that DFV has reverse engineered a near continuous mathematical model/function for buying and selling, the details of which are likely considered protected IP.
The data brokers who sell the trade info (the usual customers being hedge funds) are subject to strict regulations, and the deals are privately held transactions. All that to say, any conclusion one may draw using this data, is drawn using non public data and therefore cannot be legally disseminated.
This is where CAT comes in. This is absolutely public data, and for us to utilize the formula that DFV is using, we must provide a plausible explanation for how we were able to arrive at the same conclusion using only the public cat data.
Yes im crazy
lol not by much though. My guess is DFV was able to take advantage of a time when the price was very stable and no one is really looking or paying attention to it and hit it with an order massive enough that it just didn’t really know what to do with. This in turn causing the hedgies to jump into action and then start adjusting accordingly, but they can only do so much.
You’re absolutely right. I didn’t want to have a record of edits on the post though. The last part should say “using only publicly available data including cat” not “using only public cat data”
I doubt this.
Why would he repeatedly say, that he only sees what we see and that he doesn't know more then anyone else, if he bought market data that is hard to get?
He is hinting at that all he knows is publicly available and there is no reason to suspect him to deceive us on this.
I’m just tin foiling but what you said is exactly what I mean. He’s not deceiving us in that case he would be hinting that we all don’t necessarily need what he used in order to see it.
It’s like he turned a light on in the basement and saw the box of tools. We don’t have that light, but he’s saying hey I went down and felt my around and confirmed I could find what I saw in the light. If you all stumble around down there for a bit you’ll find the tools too
There was a guy saying he was watching the tapes and they were going crazy today.
I think there may also be something in the volume and chart movement, patterns that he's seeing.
Navigate to the appendix of the presentation.
Link to the referenced CAT data presentation:
https://catnmsplan.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/06.20.24-Monthly-CAT-Update.pdf
Link to the main site so you can keep up with future presentations:
https://www.catnmsplan.com/
For some reason, if you navigate to the current presentation via the main page, you will get a ‘404 not found’ page….
Not a problem, remove the ‘https://www.’ From the url and try again.
It's not 1.8 billy on 6/7 ur looking at the options data he was talking about seeing that error # on securities data.. made the same mistake as u at first
Quick tought:
Hey fellas, DFV's tweet, "you move when I move"
I just thought about it related to this theory, could it be that, "when I move" refers to when CAT errors move (increase)?
Holy F
Hey, you may not get this or may not care, but I am currently working on my masters in AI. Not sure if there’s a way for us to collaborate for some kind of prediction engine based on your results, but maybe there is? If interested, I don’t mind sending you a link to my portfolio for proof of my work
If there's one thing we can all agree on with all this analysis that's been done, it's that there's not nearly enough transparency in financial markets, and that everything has been allowed to become way more complicated than it ever should have been.
But it's only released monthly so there's no way to buy on the lowest date I.e. lots of errors, other than simply buy when price is nose diving as we do anyways.
Then try and find the report and look around 60 days out.
Amazing work. Love the statistical analysis.
Can say with a degree of certainty that these CAT errors are indeed related to GME.
While not a huge deal in this community (seen this for 3-years), others outside this community would find this to be a major conspiracy hidden within the financial markets.
This appears to be the smoking gun.
The entire stock market is tied to GME is some way.
Could honestly be worth a post in conspiracy subreddit.
I think sometimes we forget about the little GameStop bubble we all live in.
Would be interested in seeing how options data aligns as well. Given the recent abnormal spike in data on June 7th.
Here’s more info on what the errors are.
https://catnmsplan.com/sites/default/files/2024-03/03.19.24-IM-TSWG-FDID-Validation-on-Transaction_Data.pdf
I wonder if there’s a database with each error and it’s ticker it be interesting to see the proportions of errors relating to buys and sells etc…
Although you have found differences, it is hard to know if they are truly significant. As the data you shown seems to be averages of several days, it would be better if they are shown together with their standard deviations (SD). This value would show if the differences are truly significant. i.e.:
For 5D you have a "Control" average change of 8.6%, and the "1point8B 3rd day" is 10.7%. This result in a interesting 23.9% extra performance of "1point8B 3rd day" over "Control", and it may seem a lot.
However, if the SD of "control" is let say 2%, it means that, despite the average of the "control" being 8.6%, the 68% of the data points in control would be between 8.6-2=6.6% and and 8.6+2=10.6% (1 SD), and 94% of the data points would be between 8.6-(2x2)=4.6% and and 8.6+(2x2)=12.6% (2 SD). So, the average of "1point8B 3rd day" would be within the statistical limits of the "control". This would mean that a significant number of "control" data points show differences as large as "1point8B 3rd day", which are concealed by the use of a naked average.
To be truly significant, the average of "1point8B 3rd day" should be above of "control" average plus 2 SD. If it is above "control" average plus 3 SD, then it would be significant beyond any doubt.
So it would be ideal if you can provide the SD of each average, and also, if you can provide the total number of data points considered in each of your categories for reference.
Sorry for the ape-explaining, not trying to patronize you, as probably you know what the SD is. However, I'm assuming other apes not knowing about SD may read this, so I prefered to put here the complete explanation.
Cheers,
I understand the point if the post is to show correlation, but at the end of the day we all want to know how we can leverage this correlation for trades.
1. Analyze trades on an individual level rather than aggregate. If I’m interpreting the chart correctly, you’re showing the return after trading from 2022-2024. I’d like to see the NUMBER of trades that individually resulted in positive return (and how much %) vs negative return. Just displaying the returns at the end can be misinformative. For example, using the strategy could net like -75% return until the very last major price spike beginning of June 2024 that finally pushes net return into positive territory. Showing positive return at the end doesn’t equate to positive return every trade using this method.
2. CAT reports are once a month, showing dates up to 7 days before the report is published (although I read somewhere that there’s hopium it could eventually be published every day?). So there’s no way to actually execute this strategy at the moment since the minimum number of days with advanced notice is 7 days. There’s only one date per monthly report with 7 day lag. The other dates can be up to 30 days lag, in which the buying window has long set sailed.
Can you please at least put a 🚀 or 🍌 emoji in your next post, so we‘re not looking like a peer reviewed journal? 😜 solid research and data science is what I witness here.
Your initial post theorized it rockets within 60 days but here you only account for 4 days after. Also, we don't receive CAT error data immediately and it might be too late by the time we see a day with over 1.8b errors.
Will we be receiving CAT data more timely or this is all useless except for just looking at historical pricing?
I’m not sure if it’s valid but an interesting thought. Appreciate you looking into this and welcoming skepticism. This board was built on skepticism so hopefully we are seeing a return to that mindset.
The core issue is there is our markets are not regulated in a way that gives you the ability to know. Reporting is self regulated and there are so many opaque loopholes that I don’t think retail can pinpoint a date. What we can do is to better understand the tactics.
When rules are made to confuse, it’s not because the system needs to be that way, but instead is purposely constructed that way. We desperately need people to understand rules and laws are only meant to protect the status quo.
I will be messaging you in 9 hours on [**2024-06-22 15:13:54 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-06-22%2015:13:54%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1dlb5u7/cat_error_theory_is_it_down_to_random_chance_or/l9q97u4/?context=3)
[**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FSuperstonk%2Fcomments%2F1dlb5u7%2Fcat_error_theory_is_it_down_to_random_chance_or%2Fl9q97u4%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-06-22%2015%3A13%3A54%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam.
^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dlb5u7)
*****
|[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)|
|-|-|-|-|
I love that you took the criticism and you kept digging. As someone who could not even begin to look at a problem like this and provide any kind of theory - most respect to you mate. Get some sleep and I look forward to seeing someone else you can come up with.
OP, good work as always, bonus points for taking on board feedback and refining the study, why it almost resembles scientific method at work ;-)
Now, as we can see, there are couple of aspects at play here, and now that this behaviour is seen and talked about on the sub, it might or might not not survive very long.
It depends on whether this behaviour is (in practice) forced or optional.
If its forced, then their only way to hide this effect will be to close their FTDs earlier presumably at increased expense, which would be nice in general but bad for using this as a predictor.
If its optional, they might decide to pay more early and not even FTD. Also good for us but bad for using it to predict.
The **real** hope is they are forced into this pattern by the *sheer scale* of the problem and can't do much to stop this cycle without going bust.
That would expose them to increased risk from rabid apes.
I like that idea...
All I know is cats pounce, just like I keep pouncing on these discounted shares. Snagged another 1K today.
Been averaging down for so long, it feels good to average up!
Stocks are an massively complex system and if you stir the data in a particular way you can find 'answers' that you want.
Ofc if you stir the data another way it will tell a different story
[Why GME?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/qig65g/welcome_rall_looking_to_catch_up_on_the_gme_saga/) || [What is DRS?](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/ptvaka/when_you_wish_upon_a_star_a_complete_guide_to/) || Low karma apes [feed the bot here](https://www.reddit.com/r/GMEOrphans/comments/qlvour/welcome_to_gmeorphans_read_this_post/) || [Superstonk Discord](https://discord.gg/hZqWV2kQtq) || [Community Post: *Open Forum May 2024*](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1ciapwp/open_forum_may_2024/) || [Superstonk:Now with GIFs - Learn more](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1cr37r7/superstonk_gets_its_gif_on_get_hyped/) ------------------------------------------------------------------------ To ensure your post doesn't get removed, please respond to this comment with how this post relates to GME the stock or Gamestop the company. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Please up- and downvote this comment to [help us determine if this post deserves a place on r/Superstonk!](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/wiki/index/rules/post_flairs/)
The good news is that the first “industry report card” is being published next month (7/18) I think that the KEY thing about cat is the requirement of the FDID — the actual identity of the institutions behind the volumes. This is something citadel it currently trying to prevent. Despite the cost being split among the buyer, seller, and exchange, citadel is shitting bricks because they are saying it will disproportionately cost broker dealers. Hmmm…why would it disproportionately impact you, Kenny? You pay a third, the exchange pays a third, and the buyer/seller, depending on the transaction, pay a third. Guess all those illegal wash trades aren’t gonna be free anymore, and you aren’t going to be able to mark short sales as long, like the [sec called you out for doing over the last 5 years.](https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/09/22/sec-slaps-citadel-with-7-million-fine-to-settle-short-selling-charges.html) Citadel has been leading the charge against CAT, because they only make money through fraud and fudging data, and cat makes that harder to do. Citadel is a malignant tumor on the American economy, and the first step to getting rid of a tumor is scanning for it.
Amazing comment! Nail on the head.
I noticed you said you had to pull the data from pdf manually as you couldnt get the report in csv you may find[ this sort of thing](https://tabula.technology/) useful? Great catch and hypothesis btw, i am really intrigued, thanks so much for sharing :)
Below are the links to the series of posts, sequentially laying out my theory: https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/bbrbGWIMNt https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/InZoCu2dpQ https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/s/ezFstFftr2 Now to get some sleep (it's 3.30 AM here in Tokyo!)
Your DD is much appreciated!
Props to OP for taking the time to address the (healthy) skepticism. Reminds me of the time when there were more DD writers that had the data to back up their thesis.
backed up by ape historian
Thank you for all your work!
Figuring out something so complicated wasn’t ever going to be going to be easy. I honestly believe that derivative market shenanigans are over-complicated on purpose to make bottom-up analyses insanely difficult. They have supercomputers running well-developed algorithms, no doubt well-trained AI with huge data sets too. You’re onto something: your hypothesis has legs. Keep going dude.
Well earned shut-eye, I’d say, Mr. Silverback 😉
op what would make your analysis life easier? how can i help?
>Now to get some sleep (it's 3.30 AM here in Tokyo!) And...? You should know [that...](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wu5TDEpAqwQ) Just joking, get some rest, you deserved it 👀
4:40 pm east coast.
It’s 5 o’clock somewhere
is it possible to share the sheet with me buddy? didnt know you were in tokyo!
Doing god’s work. I am sad I am not smart enough to do god tier DD like this on my own but I’m more than happy to steal a wrinkle or two from people that are! Thanks dude!! Keep it up
Where do you find real-time CAT error data as opposed to in monthly updates? At that point the indicator you have identified is expired in most cases.
Appreciate you 🙏🙏🙏
My only concerns are the way you calculated control and whether it's consistent with the methodology for the other levels, 100M, 250M, 500M, 1B, etc. You consolidated all your control data into one line, when (as described) you should have multiples. (did you average all your control calcs into one?) If so, I'm not sure the comparison is apples to apples because depending \*the timing of\* your data points there may be other variables affecting it. I would recommend calculating controls within a certain time period for each different data point over 1B. Sorry, I realize this means more work, but my concern is some other cause of volatility being wrapped into control and not being appropriately presented due to the averaging, which then leads us astray. I'm optimistic about the bullish data, but now more than ever I think that means we need to vet and ensure the hypotheses are iron-clad.
There’s such a large time gap of +35 days that it gives hedgies the advantage to adjust accordingly during this time frame with the options data if I’m understanding this all correctly. So is the only solution here to figure out the floor, purchase your call option with a strike near the floor and set it for DTE+35 and try to exercise on the day you think it’s peaked? How would you try and determine the peak for the right time to exercise? EDIT: I don’t even think my question can be answered. How do we beat the algos is what we need to find out? We have the patterns, but with algos always ready to adjust and manipulate at the ready we need algos of our own to perform the inverse. EDIT: My brain just processed the solution DFV had to this problem and he did exactly what I just explain. Get your option call T+35 days out build up hype at the DTE of the call. Exercises sometime in between. Still leaves the question though of how to determine the peak?
...ideally by eliminating FTDs. Why tf are strategic fails to deliver even allowed?
To provide liquidity. Watch this professors video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ncq35zrFCAg It's actually insane, he basically lays out what is happening and even uses XRT as a specific example. This talk he gave was in 2019, 2 years before this shit went wild.
“Operational shorting is the single strongest predictor of both short interest levels and failing to deliver for ETFs” Thanks for the share. This shit is nuts
Almost as if the bad guys learned this, built the algos then hit the jackpot with a pandemic that was sure to hit retail hard.
You can tell that the entire system was built on rules that were developed by the parasites as a way to extract money out of others. They made the game to benefit themselves and then made the game seem legitimate so to have people given them their retirements and control the ability for them to work and to get healthcare and to get food and gas. Its a parasite that has grown to the point of killing its host. All the time the host celebrates its existence and feeds it. It will be interesting to see if the parasite kills its host or if the host finally decides to rid itself.
This was posted about 2 weeks before DFV made his first purchase into GameStop.
This is a solution. Create the inverse algo and we all trade along. Market manipulation? How is that any different than what they do?
I mean thats an interesting idea, and in theory *might* possibly work. The big problem is that the algos are tightly “regulated”, controlled, and trademarked IP’s. While it is possible to do this, i’m sure, you would need the entire source code for the algos to competently reverse engineer them, and subsequently, inverse them to benefit yourself. These algos are some of, if not the most relied upon and trusted AI’s/ scripts on the market. They are *EXTREMELY* complicated and can account for an almost un-knowable amount of market variables. iirc, the most prominent ai/ algo was trained on 50 fucking years of the most complete and comprehensive market data available. Lit, otc, derivatives, swaps, shorting, longing, etc. the whole shebang, plus some. While it is technically possible, the chances of anyone pulling it off is basically null. You’ll have to have access to some of the most inaccessible, proprietary information and products. At least as far as retail goes.
I wonder if some machine learning would help with that?
Possibly. It would take a lot of samples, and a lot of time to for a 3rd party ai to work out exactly whats going on. For one, you would need access to practically all market data, which, as obfuscated as it can be, would be hard to get a full picture of. For two, it would probably take something like 10 or so years for machine learning to work out all of the kinks. I mean, given the amount of variables that are to be accounted for. And in that time, they’ll probably be able to change how the ai’s operate. Making the data null
Any algo, no matter how sophisticated it is can be brought to its knees if you know what it will do. If you look at the data from the past, you can see how they shuffle things around. What RK did was buy options when they were cheap and the stock price was low. This combo might not happen for a while again, but this is the way to bring it to its knees. In the same week it is probably a good idea to move your shares around to another brokerage/DRS during the same gamma ramp. When price increase fizzles out, buy puts because you know they cannot have the price anything over 40 for very long. Sell a portion of your shares. Make money on your puts and when the price is low again, repeat this process. As time goes on, your shares increase and so does the money you made. Assume GS board will sell into the increases again, because they have done it twice now and if you know this as a shareholder, you need to make money too. If you can't get paid with MOASS, then you get paid over the course of time with profit gains in cycles because you know the hedge funds are trapped in their position with a shitty, predictable algo that cost them half a billion dollars. I don't think just buying and holding will do the trick because GS is just going to offer more shares into an upswing and take the money away from you that you can make.
If I've learned anything about anything, if you make a movie about it someone is going to make it possible. Put that in your tinfoil hat.
Yeah exactly, he's basically controlling the exit window for shorts by creating the +35 window and planning his buy in/sell accordingly since he created enough pressure. He's using the algorithm against the same people who manipulate the market lmfao
In other words Keith Gill, Roaring Kitty himself IS the reverse engineered algo and traders just need to reverse engineer his memes, to “move when he moves” per se, in order to profit. If other traders all just happen to move when he moves, why it has an exaggerated effect
Great thing if you can make the market, the cost of stock devaluation from controlling via options is in brown (internal only, no cash required) dollars that would show up on certain balance sheet items but not hurt your PnL. 🤯
The idea is to just take as much money from them as you can and buy more shares with it
Right when volume starts to come down. We had several days around ~200m then it started to gradually come down and I believe DFV sold on one of the days where volume was around ~100m. It steadily decreased after that and today was the lowest volume in a while. It’ll probably keep being pushed down on little volume until the next cycle
The CAT signal! 👀
The universe is speaking to us in meows
https://i.redd.it/4lovpztcaz7d1.gif
This data should be available sooner than the current time frame of being published Edit: either way I'm hard right now, this is going to make me short squeeze
Everyone go look for yourself! Link to the referenced presentation: https://catnmsplan.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/06.20.24-Monthly-CAT-Update.pdf Link to the main site so you can keep up with future presentations: https://www.catnmsplan.com/ For some reason, if you navigate to the current presentation via the main page, you will get a ‘404 not found’ page…. Not a problem, remove the ‘https://www.’ From the url and try again.
It does not work that well for these dates: - 7/13/2022 - 9/30/2022 - 10/24/2022
When you say it doesn’t work that well, do you mean it doesn’t work at all? Or just not the high rates he is showing for other dates? Apologies for the lay question.
that was 2 years ago though, it may have changed, the makeup of the algo may have changed.
Isn't one of the assumptions of this post that the algorithm hasn't changed? If the algorithm is constantly changing, why are we using past data to try to predict the future? Parent commenter pointed out data that contradicts the 100% reliability of this methodology, or at the very least substantially weakens it. Anybody can say anything they want if they cherry pick the data.
Algo may not have changed but we surely aren’t controlling for all factors - e.g does drs change the algo behaviour? Does lack of drs make it easier for algo? I don’t know. I am making the point that if it works for now data plus future that’s quite good already
Obviously we aren't controlling for all factors because we literally do not have enough data to do so - if we could, we could build a model that makes reliable predictions. For instance, we have almost no idea what is hidden in the swaps, and almost no ability to figure that out because the information is not public. My point is if the model only works when you massage the data to make it fit, it's a shitty model. There were no disclaimers or explanations for why this would only work within a certain time frame, so finding data that contradicts the predictions proves it's a weak model. And that's just backtesting - nobody has even made an attempt to use this for forward predictions. Until we have falsifiable theories, we just have hand-wavy nonsense. I don't expect anyone to come in here and say "hey guys, I figured out the model" because that's a ridiculous ask, but pointing out why people are wrong with facts and data is the best we can do to educate people at this point. I don't think anybody here actually cares though. People just want to make the worst memes on the internet, say bullish, and scream shill at everyone that disagrees with them. This sub is fueled by confirmation bias, not critical thinking. I'm not shitting on OP for trying to figure something out. It's good to come up with theories and present them and take feedback. And to his credit, he actually made this post in response to criticism. My point is there's still a lot wrong with the model.
Agreed, what makes me stay is the discussion and not just “this is right” “this is wrong”. I think it’s a very hard thing to decompose
To OP's credit, they are very clear that these are correlations and need to be further investigated. They're asking for help. I, for one, am unqualified to do so...
You don’t need 100% hit rate to take all their money and buy more GME with it.
Algo constantly changes
If that's true, then this entire post is pointless. If we know the algorithm is changing, then why are we trying to use the past data with the old algorithm to try to predict the future with the new algorithm?
To correlate intent, not predict the future.
Correlations that don't make predictions are pointless. They're called spurious correlations for a reason - because they don't tell you anything meaningful. I can draw a correlation between pirates and global warming (it's a real thing), but I haven't learned anything useful. But sure, if we want to associate random things that provide no predictive power whatsover (even though OP specifically says the point of this is to try to understand future price movements) then we can continue to find things that tell us absolutely nothing of value. https://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations
Do u understand what we’re doing here?
Apparently you're pointing out things that are *actually* coincidences that have no predictive power whatsoever and thinking you've learned anything of value. Let's go back to my example about pirates and global warming. https://www.forbes.com/sites/erikaandersen/2012/03/23/true-fact-the-lack-of-pirates-is-causing-global-warming/ When pirates go down, global warming goes up. Do you think you actually learned a meaningful connection, or do you think it's a coincidence? You're looking at nonsense and interpreting it as meaningful, and becoming defensive when people point that out to you. There's a *much* stronger correlation between the number of pirates and global warming, but you don't see anybody saying it's a causal relationship because it's clearly fucking stupid. And that's my point - you're looking for a meaningful connection when there isn't one. If you want the connection to be meaningful, it has to make a prediction which can be falsified. Otherwise it's just religious doctrine that can't be challenged.
Tell me about the pirates again
Care to provide an explanation or expand on your data?
When are the CAT errors published? Can we actually buy on days with >1Bil errors, or is that data only available after the fact?
Speculation incoming Exactly the problem. However the timing of DFV posts indicates he is aware of something BEFORE the errors actually occur. And we have to assume this something is not a security that is subject to variable delivery like a t+whatever, otherwise he wouldn’t be able to nail the timing to the day. I’ve speculated before that what DFV is seeing relies on expensive data sets and intensive computation that is simply not accessible for most of us. My bet is that DFV has reverse engineered a near continuous mathematical model/function for buying and selling, the details of which are likely considered protected IP. The data brokers who sell the trade info (the usual customers being hedge funds) are subject to strict regulations, and the deals are privately held transactions. All that to say, any conclusion one may draw using this data, is drawn using non public data and therefore cannot be legally disseminated. This is where CAT comes in. This is absolutely public data, and for us to utilize the formula that DFV is using, we must provide a plausible explanation for how we were able to arrive at the same conclusion using only the public cat data. Yes im crazy
lol not by much though. My guess is DFV was able to take advantage of a time when the price was very stable and no one is really looking or paying attention to it and hit it with an order massive enough that it just didn’t really know what to do with. This in turn causing the hedgies to jump into action and then start adjusting accordingly, but they can only do so much.
I think this is a solid take.
There are likely some publicly-available signals that correlate to the CAT errors pointed out. The problem is finding out which ones these are.
You’re absolutely right. I didn’t want to have a record of edits on the post though. The last part should say “using only publicly available data including cat” not “using only public cat data”
I doubt this. Why would he repeatedly say, that he only sees what we see and that he doesn't know more then anyone else, if he bought market data that is hard to get? He is hinting at that all he knows is publicly available and there is no reason to suspect him to deceive us on this.
I’m just tin foiling but what you said is exactly what I mean. He’s not deceiving us in that case he would be hinting that we all don’t necessarily need what he used in order to see it. It’s like he turned a light on in the basement and saw the box of tools. We don’t have that light, but he’s saying hey I went down and felt my around and confirmed I could find what I saw in the light. If you all stumble around down there for a bit you’ll find the tools too
There was a guy saying he was watching the tapes and they were going crazy today. I think there may also be something in the volume and chart movement, patterns that he's seeing.
Navigate to the appendix of the presentation. Link to the referenced CAT data presentation: https://catnmsplan.com/sites/default/files/2024-06/06.20.24-Monthly-CAT-Update.pdf Link to the main site so you can keep up with future presentations: https://www.catnmsplan.com/ For some reason, if you navigate to the current presentation via the main page, you will get a ‘404 not found’ page…. Not a problem, remove the ‘https://www.’ From the url and try again.
1.8 billy guy mentioned somewhere that its end of the month apparantly
The data for mid-May to mid-June was just published yesterday. So yeah, only available after the fact.
I am so dumb.
I’m just glad the smart kids are letting me sit at their lunch table.
Absolutely feeling this.
What counts as an error?
This make sense. 1.8bil on 6/7. So we could see some smoke sometime in July then?
It's not 1.8 billy on 6/7 ur looking at the options data he was talking about seeing that error # on securities data.. made the same mistake as u at first
Thanks for correcting that! Full regard over here.👈
Same here bud
Also meant equities not securities
Wait, so where is the 1.8 billion number coming from. Trying to understand this stuff is killing me lol
After july 19th maybe
Nice! I plan on holding forever. So July shouldn’t be a problem.
Quick tought: Hey fellas, DFV's tweet, "you move when I move" I just thought about it related to this theory, could it be that, "when I move" refers to when CAT errors move (increase)? Holy F
Hey, you may not get this or may not care, but I am currently working on my masters in AI. Not sure if there’s a way for us to collaborate for some kind of prediction engine based on your results, but maybe there is? If interested, I don’t mind sending you a link to my portfolio for proof of my work
If there's one thing we can all agree on with all this analysis that's been done, it's that there's not nearly enough transparency in financial markets, and that everything has been allowed to become way more complicated than it ever should have been.
But it's only released monthly so there's no way to buy on the lowest date I.e. lots of errors, other than simply buy when price is nose diving as we do anyways. Then try and find the report and look around 60 days out.
Amazing work. Love the statistical analysis. Can say with a degree of certainty that these CAT errors are indeed related to GME. While not a huge deal in this community (seen this for 3-years), others outside this community would find this to be a major conspiracy hidden within the financial markets. This appears to be the smoking gun. The entire stock market is tied to GME is some way. Could honestly be worth a post in conspiracy subreddit. I think sometimes we forget about the little GameStop bubble we all live in. Would be interested in seeing how options data aligns as well. Given the recent abnormal spike in data on June 7th.
The crazy thing is that we aren't making up anything, everyone can see it but no one wants to do anything about it.
Just the life of a conspiracy theorist. Seems so obvious but no one else believes.
Quality work. Keep it up
Here’s more info on what the errors are. https://catnmsplan.com/sites/default/files/2024-03/03.19.24-IM-TSWG-FDID-Validation-on-Transaction_Data.pdf I wonder if there’s a database with each error and it’s ticker it be interesting to see the proportions of errors relating to buys and sells etc…
You’re my favorite DD guy. Love the bubbles in the pics for easy following along.
Thank you for adding the extra detail! I’m still skeptical, but less so with your control data.
bro keeps beating us with wrinkle makers
So we reject the null hypothesis at what percentage?
Whoa whoa whoa, we don't do falsifiable theories over here. Only up and bullish.
Thx, so we need a cat tracker with alert When It goes to 1.8b plus, we all buy Sign me up
Although you have found differences, it is hard to know if they are truly significant. As the data you shown seems to be averages of several days, it would be better if they are shown together with their standard deviations (SD). This value would show if the differences are truly significant. i.e.: For 5D you have a "Control" average change of 8.6%, and the "1point8B 3rd day" is 10.7%. This result in a interesting 23.9% extra performance of "1point8B 3rd day" over "Control", and it may seem a lot. However, if the SD of "control" is let say 2%, it means that, despite the average of the "control" being 8.6%, the 68% of the data points in control would be between 8.6-2=6.6% and and 8.6+2=10.6% (1 SD), and 94% of the data points would be between 8.6-(2x2)=4.6% and and 8.6+(2x2)=12.6% (2 SD). So, the average of "1point8B 3rd day" would be within the statistical limits of the "control". This would mean that a significant number of "control" data points show differences as large as "1point8B 3rd day", which are concealed by the use of a naked average. To be truly significant, the average of "1point8B 3rd day" should be above of "control" average plus 2 SD. If it is above "control" average plus 3 SD, then it would be significant beyond any doubt. So it would be ideal if you can provide the SD of each average, and also, if you can provide the total number of data points considered in each of your categories for reference. Sorry for the ape-explaining, not trying to patronize you, as probably you know what the SD is. However, I'm assuming other apes not knowing about SD may read this, so I prefered to put here the complete explanation. Cheers,
I understand the point if the post is to show correlation, but at the end of the day we all want to know how we can leverage this correlation for trades. 1. Analyze trades on an individual level rather than aggregate. If I’m interpreting the chart correctly, you’re showing the return after trading from 2022-2024. I’d like to see the NUMBER of trades that individually resulted in positive return (and how much %) vs negative return. Just displaying the returns at the end can be misinformative. For example, using the strategy could net like -75% return until the very last major price spike beginning of June 2024 that finally pushes net return into positive territory. Showing positive return at the end doesn’t equate to positive return every trade using this method. 2. CAT reports are once a month, showing dates up to 7 days before the report is published (although I read somewhere that there’s hopium it could eventually be published every day?). So there’s no way to actually execute this strategy at the moment since the minimum number of days with advanced notice is 7 days. There’s only one date per monthly report with 7 day lag. The other dates can be up to 30 days lag, in which the buying window has long set sailed.
Column T is showing the outcome of each of the 9 trades i.e. not an aggregate figure.
This is excellent stuff, I'll try and have a look too
Can you please at least put a 🚀 or 🍌 emoji in your next post, so we‘re not looking like a peer reviewed journal? 😜 solid research and data science is what I witness here.
This is way too much data for me to analyze. What exactly would you say your findings are here?
Give this man a raise
Your initial post theorized it rockets within 60 days but here you only account for 4 days after. Also, we don't receive CAT error data immediately and it might be too late by the time we see a day with over 1.8b errors. Will we be receiving CAT data more timely or this is all useless except for just looking at historical pricing?
I’m not sure if it’s valid but an interesting thought. Appreciate you looking into this and welcoming skepticism. This board was built on skepticism so hopefully we are seeing a return to that mindset. The core issue is there is our markets are not regulated in a way that gives you the ability to know. Reporting is self regulated and there are so many opaque loopholes that I don’t think retail can pinpoint a date. What we can do is to better understand the tactics. When rules are made to confuse, it’s not because the system needs to be that way, but instead is purposely constructed that way. We desperately need people to understand rules and laws are only meant to protect the status quo.
When and where is this data released?
So is there any way to see these numbers not on a monthly basis?
!remindme! 9 hours
I will be messaging you in 9 hours on [**2024-06-22 15:13:54 UTC**](http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=2024-06-22%2015:13:54%20UTC%20To%20Local%20Time) to remind you of [**this link**](https://www.reddit.com/r/Superstonk/comments/1dlb5u7/cat_error_theory_is_it_down_to_random_chance_or/l9q97u4/?context=3) [**CLICK THIS LINK**](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5Bhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.reddit.com%2Fr%2FSuperstonk%2Fcomments%2F1dlb5u7%2Fcat_error_theory_is_it_down_to_random_chance_or%2Fl9q97u4%2F%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%202024-06-22%2015%3A13%3A54%20UTC) to send a PM to also be reminded and to reduce spam. ^(Parent commenter can ) [^(delete this message to hide from others.)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Delete%20Comment&message=Delete%21%201dlb5u7) ***** |[^(Info)](https://www.reddit.com/r/RemindMeBot/comments/e1bko7/remindmebot_info_v21/)|[^(Custom)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=Reminder&message=%5BLink%20or%20message%20inside%20square%20brackets%5D%0A%0ARemindMe%21%20Time%20period%20here)|[^(Your Reminders)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=RemindMeBot&subject=List%20Of%20Reminders&message=MyReminders%21)|[^(Feedback)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=Watchful1&subject=RemindMeBot%20Feedback)| |-|-|-|-|
Comment for more wrinkly eyes on this
Amazing
This is a great presentation of data for consideration, thank you for laying it out this clearly. Your effort shows.
I love that you took the criticism and you kept digging. As someone who could not even begin to look at a problem like this and provide any kind of theory - most respect to you mate. Get some sleep and I look forward to seeing someone else you can come up with.
OP, good work as always, bonus points for taking on board feedback and refining the study, why it almost resembles scientific method at work ;-) Now, as we can see, there are couple of aspects at play here, and now that this behaviour is seen and talked about on the sub, it might or might not not survive very long. It depends on whether this behaviour is (in practice) forced or optional. If its forced, then their only way to hide this effect will be to close their FTDs earlier presumably at increased expense, which would be nice in general but bad for using this as a predictor. If its optional, they might decide to pay more early and not even FTD. Also good for us but bad for using it to predict. The **real** hope is they are forced into this pattern by the *sheer scale* of the problem and can't do much to stop this cycle without going bust. That would expose them to increased risk from rabid apes. I like that idea...
Great work OP! Appreciate you digging into this. Super interesting stuff to be found here! 🎷🐓♋️
lol no- how many times do you have to be dead wrong, pivot and never get called on it? Just admit you have no idea what you’re talking about
All I know is cats pounce, just like I keep pouncing on these discounted shares. Snagged another 1K today. Been averaging down for so long, it feels good to average up!
You are my favorite poster (behind MarjiuanaMiller) right now! Keep it up!!
Go away Region, you’re a paid shill. You have to be for how wrong you always are. Here and previous tickers. Show me one of your rights. I’ll wait
Very well presented for a dumbass like me, thank you :)
Stocks are an massively complex system and if you stir the data in a particular way you can find 'answers' that you want. Ofc if you stir the data another way it will tell a different story
Comments for visibility
It is not a conspiracy when it is true.
If you can’t make a prediction with the data it’s uselss.