Given my previous noises on the topic, it won’t be surprising that I agree with this post. However,
The more interesting scenario for 2024 is FiveThirtyEight is 62% on one side and the market is 62% on the other, and there is no obvious information outside of FiveThirtyEight’s model that caused that divergence. My gut tells me that I have that one about 50% each way.
it’s possible that I didn’t read the post carefully enough, but I don’t quite get this. My instinct would be to bet against the market if this happens. Why is 37⁄63 different from 63/90?
I think Zvi would also bet against the market if that happened. If he thinks the probability is 50% and the market is offering 38%, that’s a great bet.
He’s completely consistent in that he puts the probabilities of these events between the markets and Nate (which inevitably means betting against the market in the direction of the models)
Given my previous noises on the topic, it won’t be surprising that I agree with this post. However,
it’s possible that I didn’t read the post carefully enough, but I don’t quite get this. My instinct would be to bet against the market if this happens. Why is 37⁄63 different from 63/90?
I think Zvi would also bet against the market if that happened. If he thinks the probability is 50% and the market is offering 38%, that’s a great bet.
He’s completely consistent in that he puts the probabilities of these events between the markets and Nate (which inevitably means betting against the market in the direction of the models)
Oh, duh. I got confused there, but you’re right that there’s no inconsistency to explain.