cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Abdullah Hanif
Contact Email
enigma.institute.center@gmail.com
Phone
+6285161620145
Journal Mail Official
editor.enigma.economics@gmail.com
Editorial Address
Jl. Sirnaraga No 235, Kel. 8 Ilir, Kec. Ilir Timur III, Palembang, South Sumatera, Indonesia
Location
Kota palembang,
Sumatera selatan
INDONESIA
Enigma in Economics
Published by Enigma Institute
ISSN : 30266696     EISSN : 30266696     DOI : https://doi.org/10.61996/economy
Core Subject : Economy, Humanities, Education,
Humanities Economics, Econometrics & Finance Languange, Linguistic, Communication & Media
Focus Enigma in Economics focused on the development of economics and management sciences for human well-being. Scope Enigma in Economics publishes articles which encompass all aspects of economics and management sciences, especially all type of original articles, review articles, narrative review, meta-analysis, systematic review, mini-reviews and book review.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Ekonomi, Ekonometrika dan Keuangan (semua kategori) - Ilmu Ekonomi, Ekonometrika dan Keuangan (Lain-Lain)
Articles 33 Documents
 1   2   3   4 
Cyclical Timing Across Asset Classes: A Structured Narrative Review of Market Cycle Theory in Equities, Gold, and Cryptocurrency Abdul Malik; Anies Fatmawati
Enigma in Economics Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): Enigma in Economics
Publisher : Enigma Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61996/economy.v4i1.130

Abstract

Background. Cycle theory — the practice of reading prices as a nested hierarchy of cycles measured from one low to the next — is a cross-asset tradition applied to equity indices, gold and, most recently, cryptocurrency. Objective. This structured narrative review appraises the conceptual coherence and empirical support for cyclical, low-to-low market timing across three asset classes: the S&P 500 equity index, gold, and Bitcoin. Methods. We distinguish the specific, quantified practitioner rules (fixed day/week counts, tolerance bands and an asserted ~80% hit rate) from the general, peer-reviewed proposition that returns are conditionally predictable, and appraise the plausibility of the former through the evidence on the latter rather than testing the rules directly. Following SANRA guidance, we report an explicit search strategy, eligibility criteria and a DOI-authenticated corpus, and grade each core tenet with a pre-specified rubric rather than an ad-hoc numeric score. Results. The evidence is asymmetric and consistent across markets: an identifiable cyclical anchor, time-varying (adaptive) efficiency, and the amplifying association of behavioural forces are well supported, whereas a mechanically periodic multi-year cycle and high-accuracy timing of individual lows are of limited and very limited support and are vulnerable to survivorship and data-snooping biases. We contribute an integrative reflexive framework, falsifiable predictions, and a transparent evidence-grading scorecard. Conclusion. Cycle theory is best understood not as a deterministic clock but as a probabilistic, regime-conditioned scaffold. This work is educational; it is not investment advice.
Adaptive Quantile Calibration of Daily and Weekly Cycle-Low Forecasts in Bitcoin, S&P 500 Futures, and Gold Muhammad Faiz; Sonia Vernanda
Enigma in Economics Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): Enigma in Economics
Publisher : Enigma Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61996/economy.v4i1.131

Abstract

Background. Market-cycle forecasts are vulnerable to hindsight because a low becomes identifiable only after subsequent price confirmation. Objective. This study evaluated whether an adaptive, confirmation-aware interval could attain at least 80% chronological forecast precision for daily cycle lows (DCLs) and weekly cycle lows (WCLs) in Bitcoin, S&P 500 futures, and gold. Methods. The Adaptive Quantile-Calibrated Cycle Window used only the latest 20 completed cycles. Its lower endpoint was the empirical 10th percentile of prior low-to-low durations, and its upper endpoint was the 90th percentile of prior-low-to-next-confirmation durations. Forecasts originating from 1 January 2021 through 14 July 2026 were evaluated sequentially, and the retrospective protocol was externally preregistered. Results. Fixed clocks achieved 70.9% DCL precision and 55.6% WCL precision. The adaptive interval achieved 109/127 DCL hits (85.8%; 95% CI 78.7%–90.8%) and 27/27 WCL hits (100.0%; 95% CI 87.5%–100.0%). Mean window width increased from 14.7 to 32.8 days for DCL and from 4.0 to 11.7 weeks for WCL. A wider 5th–95th percentile band produced 93.7% DCL precision with a 95% lower confidence bound of 88.1%. Conclusion. Adaptive interval calibration exceeded the 80% point target, but the gain depended on materially wider windows and a small WCL sample; prospective replication remains necessary.
Can Technical Indicators Predict Daily Price Direction? Walk-Forward Evidence from Bitcoin, the S&P 500, and Gold Ifah Shandy; Benyamin Wongso
Enigma in Economics Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): Enigma in Economics
Publisher : Enigma Institute

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.61996/economy.v4i1.132

Abstract

Background. Technical analysis remains among the most accessible forms of market decision support, but its incremental predictive value depends on design choices, and repeated model selection can create spurious backtest performance. Objective. This study evaluates whether widely used technical indicators, reconstructed from public formulas, can predict the next daily price direction of Bitcoin, the S&P 500, and gold. Methods. Daily data from 1 January 2015 to 14 July 2026 are examined using a chronological walk-forward design. Every signal observed at the close of day t is matched only with the sign of the close-to-close return from t to t+1. The main out-of-sample period begins in 2019, with 2019–2022 used for model selection and 2023–2026 reserved for confirmation. Performance is measured primarily by balanced accuracy and supplemented by accuracy, directional recall, stationary-bootstrap confidence intervals, and after-cost trading outcomes. Results. The best single indicator, Ichimoku 9/26/52, produced a macro balanced accuracy of 50.9%, while the best predetermined combination, Volume Confirmed, reached 50.8%. A new ridge-logistic hybrid indicator, SPAH-1, achieved 51.9% in validation and 51.3% in confirmation. Its confirmation balanced accuracy was 49.8% for Bitcoin, 49.2% for the S&P 500 proxy, and 55.0% for gold; only gold's bootstrap interval excluded 50%, but its predictions were strongly biased toward the upward class. After trading costs, Volume Confirmed underperformed buy-and-hold for all three assets. Additional selective experiments did not support an 80% daily prediction target. Conclusion. Technical indicators may assist regime description and decision confirmation, but they do not provide a robust universal next-day forecasting edge.

Page 4 of 4 | Total Record : 33

 1   2   3   4 

Filter by Year

2023 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol. 4 No. 1 (2026): Enigma in Economics Vol. 3 No. 2 (2025): Enigma in Economics Vol. 3 No. 1 (2025): Enigma in Economics Vol. 2 No. 2 (2024): Enigma in Economics Vol. 2 No. 1 (2024): Enigma in Economics Vol. 1 No. 2 (2023): Enigma in Economics Vol. 1 No. 1 (2023): Enigma in Economics