"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
Not necessarily Roddy. You need to think outside the box here.
The data set used to calculate the z-score for each component for each year is not necessarily the entire data set for the 1997-2015 period.
Based on Citi's previous analysis of bubbles, it's more likely to be based on the 10-year average.
When Z is greater than two standard deviations above the 10-year average, Citi considers this to be a bubble indicator...
Not the bubble meter mother cat.
Based on the creepy clown maths,
-- The z-score for TOT is -2. Therefore, the probability it could be this bad is 0.05 (based on the creepy clown story). -- The z-score for mining investment is almost -3. Therefore, on the creepy clown method, there is only a 1% chance it could be so far from the mean. -- House prices has a z-score of approx 1.5. The z-score represents the distance from the mean. That means that approx 19% of the time, house prices have been higher. Not exactly what the creepy clown is saying, but it's clear that you don't understand basic maths.
Citi Research have build the z-scores from the components across a time period from 1997-2015. The z-scores are calculated using a simple process that should basically explained in most school text books (Z-score = _ _ _ _ _ _ score - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ score).
See if you can get your kids' school books and work it out.
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
Roddy, you can waffle about creepy clowns as much as you like.
I've explained how Citi construct their chart. You simply lack the capacity to comprehend it. The end.
Stick to what you know Roddy - i.e. waffling about trolls and stuff.
That's right. You said the z-score represents the difference from the mean.
That's not what Citi have done.
If the z-score for the bubble meter is -0.5 and the z-score for house prices is 1.5, this is conceptually, pretty basic stuff. That is why both graphs are necessary. The z-score is not the difference from the mean. The z-score is the actual value subtracted from the expected value across all components across all years. The bubble meter z-score for each year is calculated from the sum of the component values for the respective year, concerted to expected values (data normalization using chi square).
Without the bubble meter z-score, the house price z-score is meaningless.
That's right. You said the z-score represents the difference from the mean.
That's not what Citi have done.
If the z-score for the bubble meter is -0.5 and the z-score for house prices is 1.5, this is conceptually, pretty basic stuff. That is why both graphs are necessary. The z-score is not the difference from the mean. The z-score is the actual value subtracted from the expected value across all components across all years. The bubble meter z-score for each year is calculated from the sum of the component values for the respective year, concerted to expected values (data normalization using chi square).
Without the bubble meter z-score, the house price z-score is meaningless.
Roddy, you have absolutely no idea. Here's how it works...
1. Citi consider an asset to be in bubble territory if Z is greater than two SD above its 10-year average 2. Citi calculate Z for each of the five components to determine whether each component is "bubbly" 3. Citi combine those five Z scores into an overall "bubble" reading for that year 4. Citi plot that bubble reading for the years 1997 - 2015 on their "bubble meter" chart
Pretty basic stuff, but I think you're better off waffling about trolls and stuff, rather than trying to understand it.
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
Roddy, you have absolutely no idea. Here's how it works...
1. Citi consider an asset to be in bubble territory if Z is greater than two SD above its 10-year average 2. Citi calculate Z for each of the five components to determine whether each component is "bubbly" 3. Citi combine those five Z scores into an overall "bubble" reading for that year 4. Citi plot that bubble reading for the years 1997 - 2015 on their "bubble meter" chart
Pretty basic stuff, but I think you're better off waffling about trolls and stuff, rather than trying to understand it.
1. House prices are 2 standard deviations above the bubble meter you fool. The bubble meter is the "average" across the distribution converted to a z-score.
2. The z-score is calculated by the actual value / expected value calculated using chi-square normalization.
3 and 4. The "bubble reading" is the z-score for each year, which is calculated using chi-square normalization.
That is why mining investment has a z-score close to -3, not because mining investment is at its lowest level ever. Likewise, that is why house prices only have a z-score of 1.5, not 3.
3 and 4. The "bubble reading" is the z-score for each year, which is calculated using chi-square normalization.
That is why mining investment has a z-score close to -3, not because mining investment is at its lowest level ever. Likewise, that is why house prices only have a z-score of 1.5, not 3.
No, it is as I described in the previous post Roddy.
"The truth is that there are no good men, or bad men. It is the deeds that have goodness or badness in them. There are good deeds, and bad deeds. Men are just men."
No, it is as I described in the previous post Roddy.
OK mother cat. According to the creepy clown maths, the difference between a z score of -0.5 and 1.5 is not 2. Roll around in your excrement some more.
OK, according to a creepy clown repertoire, the bubble meter for Australia is calculated on entirely different research using an entirely different methodology using entirely different data sets using entirely different time frames. Rolling around in excrement some more I see.
OK, chi-square normalization is not used to calculate z-scores across different components across a time series of years......because a creepy clown says so.
Australian Property Forum is an economics and finance forum dedicated to discussion of Australian and global real estate markets and macroeconomics, including house prices, housing affordability, and the likelihood of a property crash. Is there an Australian housing bubble? Will house prices crash, boom or stagnate? Is the Australian property market a pyramid scheme or Ponzi scheme? Can house prices really rise forever? These are the questions we address on Australian Property Forum, the premier real estate site for property bears, bulls, investors, and speculators. Members may also discuss matters related to finance, modern monetary theory (MMT), debt deflation, cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin Ethereum and Ripple, property investing, landlords, tenants, debt consolidation, reverse home equity loans, the housing shortage, negative gearing, capital gains tax, land tax and macro prudential regulation.
Forum Rules:
The main forum may be used to discuss property, politics, economics and finance, precious metals, crypto currency, debt management, generational divides, climate change, sustainability, alternative energy, environmental topics, human rights or social justice issues, and other topics on a case by case basis. Topics unsuitable for the main forum may be discussed in the lounge. You agree you won't use this forum to post material that is illegal, private, defamatory, pornographic, excessively abusive or profane, threatening, or invasive of another forum member's privacy. Don't post NSFW content. Racist or ethnic slurs and homophobic comments aren't tolerated. Accusing forum members of serious crimes is not permitted. Accusations, attacks, abuse or threats, litigious or otherwise, directed against the forum or forum administrators aren't tolerated and will result in immediate suspension of your account for a number of days depending on the severity of the attack. No spamming or advertising in the main forum. Spamming includes repeating the same message over and over again within a short period of time. Don't post ALL CAPS thread titles. The Advertising and Promotion Subforum may be used to promote your Australian property related business or service. Active members of the forum who contribute regularly to main forum discussions may also include a link to their product or service in their signature block. Members are limited to one actively posting account each. A secondary account may be used solely for the purpose of maintaining a blog as long as that account no longer posts in threads. Any member who believes another member has violated these rules may report the offending post using the report button.
Australian Property Forum complies with ASIC Regulatory Guide 162 regarding Internet Discussion Sites. Australian Property Forum is not a provider of financial advice. Australian Property Forum does not in any way endorse the views and opinions of its members, nor does it vouch for for the accuracy or authenticity of their posts. It is not permitted for any Australian Property Forum member to post in the role of a licensed financial advisor or to post as the representative of a financial advisor. It is not permitted for Australian Property Forum members to ask for or offer specific buy, sell or hold recommendations on particular stocks, as a response to a request of this nature may be considered the provision of financial advice.
Views expressed on this forum are not representative of the forum owners. The forum owners are not liable or responsible for comments posted. Information posted does not constitute financial or legal advice. The forum owners accept no liability for information posted, nor for consequences of actions taken on the basis of that information. By visiting or using this forum, members and guests agree to be bound by the Zetaboards Terms of Use.
This site may contain copyright material (i.e. attributed snippets from online news reports), the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such content is posted to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democratic, scientific, and social justice issues. This constitutes 'fair use' of such copyright material as provided for in section 107 of US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed for research and educational purposes only. If you wish to use this material for purposes that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. Such material is credited to the true owner or licensee. We will remove from the forum any such material upon the request of the owners of the copyright of said material, as we claim no credit for such material.
Privacy Policy: Australian Property Forum uses third party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our site. These third party advertising companies may collect and use information about your visits to Australian Property Forum as well as other web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here: Google Advertising Privacy FAQ
Australian Property Forum is hosted by Zetaboards. Please refer also to the Zetaboards Privacy Policy