FE is echoing one of the age-old questions on correlation - who is leading whom, and why the divergence?
Personally, I find correlation difficult to act on offensively, that is I cannot enter a trade based on correlation or divergence of correlation, I seldom get it right, often it seems like a 50/50 choice.
However, defensively I find correlation or divergence to be an invaluable tool to either keep me out of a bad trade or to signal an exit from an existing one.
My post the other evening on the Aussie where I suggested that based on Gold correlation I would have been reluctant to short the Aussie at that point was an example.
A current example is Eur/Usd and Gbp/Usd.
There are many valid economic reasons for these two to correlate, just as there is for the Aussie and Gold, I must therefore recognize that there has to be a valid reason when they diverge, not knowing the reason I therefore will neither sell GBP or buy EUR tomorrow - due to the divergence on Friday.
This lesson I gleaned from a trader who taught it in 1940:
Quote:
"âŚafter the declaration of war in Europe a natural reaction (now called a retracement) occurred in the whole market.
Then all stocks in the 4 prominent groups recovered their reaction and all sold at new high prices - with the exception of the stocks in the steel groups."
Unquote.
The correlation between steel and the others had broken, the author, nor indeed any of his contemporaries, knew why - many speculators would have bought steel on the anticipation that it would follow the rest as it normally did - not so the author, his reasoning was simple, he did not know the reason for the divergence.
Quote.
"It was not until the middle in Jan 1940, 4 months later, that the public was given the facts and the action of the steel stocks was explained. An announcement was made that the English Government has disposed of over 100,000 shares of US Steel and in addition Canada had sold 20,000 shares."
Unquote.
The Author was a certain Jesse Livermore.