So this doesn't mean that higher BPM songs in the charts predict rising stock prizes?
"No, BPM is the average of the beat. I was looking at the variance of the beat. Also, and similarly, it doesn't predict the average of the stock returns, it seems to predict the variance of the stock returns."
Ah - so if charted songs get more monotone, stock prizes will show higher peaks and lows. This tends to be the case in a bear market, right? But, stocks have gone up quite a bit recently with a tendency towards a decreasing volatility. Were there any recent hits predicting this?
"Not so much monotone as steady, less complex beats. Volatility does seem to increase more in down markets but not exclusively. The last hits I looked at predicted that 2009 would have lower volatility than 2008, though it would still be above the typical market volatility. A strategy based on the findings would have sold volatility in 2009 in the high 40s when it was trading there in Dec 2008. It is too early to tell if it will definitely be profitable but it looks good so far. Of course this is not intended to be a standalone strategy but rather a first step at looking at the relationship between popular culture and the financial markets."
If you look into Billboard right now, what is you expectation for the next few months?
"I haven't had a chance to rerun the analysis so I don't know."
Can you make a top 10 of bands who have a positive efffect on the stock market?
"Positive meaning lower variance? These would be artists like Ray Charles and Barbra Streisand."
And how about Michael Jackson's songs?
On average too Michael Jackson tended to have more complex, higher beat variance songs than the overall average. So the more people chose to listen to Michael Jackson's songs, the lower the future market volatility tended to be. His new tour, if successful and popular, could have been just the thing to revitalize the economy.
1 | 2 | 3
all interviews
