Files

4.4 KiB

US Market Bubble Detector - Changelog

Version 2.1 (November 3, 2025)

Critical Issue Fixed

Problem Identified: v2.0 allowed excessive qualitative adjustments based on unmeasured "narratives" and subjective impressions, leading to inflated bubble risk scores.

Example Case (Nov 3, 2025):

  • Quantitative Score (Phase 2): 9 points (objective, data-driven)
  • Qualitative Adjustment (v2.0): +2 points
    • Media Narrative: +1 (based on "elevated AI narrative" - NO DATA)
    • Valuation: +1 (P/E 30.8 - DOUBLE COUNTED, ignored fundamental backing)
  • Result: 11/16 points → Euphoria phase → 40% risk budget (overly defensive)

Root Cause: Confirmation bias - analyst had bearish conclusion first, then adjusted qualitative points to match expectation.

Changes in v2.1

1. Stricter Qualitative Criteria (MAX +3, down from +5)

A. Social Penetration (0-1 points)

  • v2.0: Loose criteria, "general awareness" acceptable
  • v2.1: ALL three required:
    • Direct user report of non-investor recommendations
    • Specific examples with dates/names
    • Multiple independent sources (minimum 3)

B. Media/Search Trends (0-1 points)

  • v2.0: Subjective "many reports" acceptable
  • v2.1: BOTH required:
    • Google Trends 5x+ YoY (measured data)
    • Mainstream coverage confirmed (Time covers, TV specials with dates)
  • Critical: "Elevated narrative" without data = 0 points

C. Valuation Disconnect (0-1 points)

  • v2.0: P/E >25 alone sufficient
  • v2.1: ALL required AND avoid double-counting:
    • P/E >25 (if NOT in Phase 2)
    • Fundamentals explicitly ignored in discourse
    • "This time is different" documented in major media
  • Self-check: If companies have real earnings supporting valuations → 0 points

2. Confirmation Bias Prevention

New mandatory checklist before adding ANY qualitative points:

□ Do I have concrete, measurable data? (not impressions)
□ Would an independent observer reach the same conclusion?
□ Am I avoiding double-counting with Phase 2 scores?
□ Have I documented specific evidence with sources?

3. Granular Risk Phases

New "Elevated Risk" Phase (8-9 points)

  • v2.0: 9 points = Euphoria = 40% risk budget (extreme defensive)
  • v2.1: 9 points = Elevated Risk = 50-70% risk budget (balanced caution)

Updated Risk Budget Matrix:

Score Phase v2.0 Risk Budget v2.1 Risk Budget Change
0-4 Normal 100% 100% -
5-7 Caution 70% 70-80% More flexible
8-9 Elevated Risk 40% (Euphoria) 50-70% NEW PHASE
10-12 Euphoria 40% 40-50% More balanced
13-15 Critical 20% 20-30% Reduced max

4. Maximum Score Reduction

  • v2.0: 0-16 points (Phase 2: 12, Phase 3: -1 to +5)
  • v2.1: 0-15 points (Phase 2: 12, Phase 3: 0 to +3)

Impact on Nov 3, 2025 Analysis

Under v2.0:

  • Score: 11/16 → Euphoria phase
  • Risk Budget: 40%
  • Positioning: Extreme defensive

Under v2.1 (corrected):

  • Quantitative: 9/12 (unchanged, data-driven)
  • Qualitative:
    • Media Narrative: 0 points (no Google Trends data)
    • Valuation: 0 points (AI has fundamental backing, double-counting)
  • Score: 9/15 → Elevated Risk phase
  • Risk Budget: 50-70%
  • Positioning: Cautious but not extreme

Key Learnings

  1. Data > Impressions: "Elevated narrative" is not measurable evidence
  2. Avoid Double-Counting: Valuation in Phase 2 quantitative ≠ add again in Phase 3
  3. Check Internal Consistency: If report admits "AI has fundamental backing," then valuation disconnect score must be 0
  4. Independent Verification: All qualitative points must be verifiable by independent observers

Documentation Updates

  • SKILL.md: Updated to v2.1 with strict criteria
  • references/implementation_guide.md: Enhanced Phase 3 with bias prevention checklist
  • references/quick_reference.md: Updated action matrix with new Elevated Risk phase
  • references/bubble_framework.md: Updated risk budget table

Version 2.0 (October 27, 2025)

Initial Major Revision

  • Introduced mandatory quantitative data collection
  • Eliminated reliance on impressions and speculation
  • Established clear threshold settings for each indicator
  • Two-phase evaluation process: Quantitative → Qualitative

Version Control:

  • v1.x: Original framework (deprecated)
  • v2.0: Data-driven quantitative focus
  • v2.1: Strict qualitative criteria + confirmation bias prevention