Historical Echoes: When Pig<em>skins</em> Fly – the Super Bowl and Other “Predictors”   Liberty Street Economics
Liberty Street Economics

« Tough Decisions, Depleted Revenues: New Jersey’s Education Finances during the Great Recession | Main | How Has the Business of International Banking Changed? »

February 03, 2012

Historical Echoes: When Pigskins Fly – the Super Bowl and Other “Predictors”

Mary Tao, New York Fed Research Library

More than three decades ago, Robert Stovall, a money manager, championed a theory put forth by a sports columnist. Stovall studied the performance of stock indexes after each Super Bowl and concluded that the winner could predict stock market trends. For fifteen consecutive years, between 1967 and 1983, the New York Stock Exchange showed annual gains when a team from the old National Football League won the Super Bowl and fell when a team from the old American Football League emerged as the victor.

    Two academic researchers put Stovall’s conclusions to the test; their findings, published in a 1990 Journal of Finance paper, showed that the predictions were accurate twenty out of twenty-two times between 1967 and 1988 for each of the following stock indexes: New York Stock Exchange, S&P 500, Dow Jones Industrial Average, and American Stock Exchange. (Note that the researchers used the pre-merger placement of the Pittsburgh and Baltimore teams. So the victories by the Steelers [1975-76, 1979-80] and Colts [1971] counted as NFL wins.)

    In more recent times, the accuracy rate drops significantly, or perhaps not, depending on one’s perspective. Among various debunkings of the theory, this humorous one comes with a great line: “Statistically significant success in prediction does not automatically lead to economically profitable strategies.”

    New York Giants fans who also subscribe to this Super Bowl theory: You have one more reason to root for your team. Should the Giants prevail this year, however, let’s hope it doesn’t cause a repeat of the 2008 experience, when stock markets diverged from the theory and experienced a downward spiral.

    Super Bowl victories aside, sales of these items have also been cited for their ability to gauge the state of economic activity: lipstick, Spam, and cardboard boxes.

    Because official statistics are subject to publication lags, some researchers have begun to examine Internet search terms and word frequency for more timely insight into economic conditions. Searches for “jobs” and “unemployment benefits” were compared with unemployment data over the same period, while “estate agents” was correlated with house price inflation as a likely predictor of changes in employment rates and housing prices, respectively. A more recent New York Fed finding declared that “Internet search counts possess useful information, not available in other variables, to now-cast or forecast the trajectory of some financial market data.”

    The Economist evaluated the number of newspaper articles using the term “recession,” thus creating the R-word index. Researchers at the San Francisco Fed expanded on the index by examining more search terms in thirty newspapers to gauge consumer sentiment. And an analysis of social-media posts led to the announcement in 2011 of the high-heel index.


Disclaimer
The views expressed in this post are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the position of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or the Federal Reserve System. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the author.
Posted by Blog Author at 07:00:00 AM in Exchange Rates, Historical Echoes
Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Nice informative blog, thanks for sharing.

The comments to this entry are closed.

About the Blog
Liberty Street Economics features insight and analysis from New York Fed economists working at the intersection of research and policy. Launched in 2011, the blog takes its name from the Bank’s headquarters at 33 Liberty Street in Manhattan’s Financial District.

The editors are Michael Fleming, Andrew Haughwout, Thomas Klitgaard, and Donald Morgan, all economists in the Bank’s Research Group.

The views expressed are those of the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the New York Fed or the Federal Reserve System.


Economic Research Tracker

Liberty Street Economics is now available on the iPhone® and iPad® and can be customized by economic research topic or economist.


Useful Links
Comment Guidelines
We encourage your comments and queries on our posts and will publish them (below the post) subject to the following guidelines:
Please be brief: Comments are limited to 1500 characters.
Please be quick: Comments submitted after COB on Friday will not be published until Monday morning.
Please be aware: Comments submitted shortly before or during the FOMC blackout may not be published until after the blackout.
Please be on-topic and patient: Comments are moderated and will not appear until they have been reviewed to ensure that they are substantive and clearly related to the topic of the post. We reserve the right not to post any comment, and will not post comments that are abusive, harassing, obscene, or commercial in nature. No notice will be given regarding whether a submission will or will not be posted.‎
Disclosure Policy
The LSE editors ask authors submitting a post to the blog to confirm that they have no conflicts of interest as defined by the American Economic Association in its Disclosure Policy. If an author has sources of financial support or other interests that could be perceived as influencing the research presented in the post, we disclose that fact in a statement prepared by the author and appended to the author information at the end of the post. If the author has no such interests to disclose, no statement is provided. Note, however, that we do indicate in all cases if a data vendor or other party has a right to review a post.
Archives