
Welcome, friend and future deep-dweller!
In this episode of Deeponomics, we take a closer look at the enduring practice of market forecasting—despite decades of evidence showing how rarely it works.
We explore three major schools of thought—neoclassical, behavioral, and institutional economics—to see whether any of them can justify the financial analyst’s role. Each offers a different lens on why forecasts are made, but none quite explains why they should work.
In the end, we suggest that forecasting is not really about prediction. It is about sensemaking. In a world of uncertainty, forecasts offer structure, direction, and a shared story we can act on—even when the future remains unknown.
References:
Leins, S. (2018) Stories of Capitalism: Inside the Role of Financial Analysts. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Working, H. (1934) ‘A random-difference series for use in the analysis of time series’, Journal of the American Statistical Association, 29(185), pp. 11–24.
Kendall, M.G. (1953) ‘The analysis of economic time series’, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series A (General), 116(1), pp. 11–34.
Osborne, M.F.M. (1959) ‘Brownian motion in the stock market’, Operations Research, 7(2), pp. 145–173.
—
Find Us Deep
Substack: deeponomics.substack.com
Instagram: @deeponomics
YouTube: @Deeponomics
Website: deeponomics.com
Email: info@deeponomics.com