Interesting to compare the current collapse of most major currencies against the U.S. dollar with what is happening in emerging markets (click on either figure for a larger version):

[via PERS]

We're deep in that nutty phase of the markets where they go pounding off in either direction, almost whimsically, depending on the latest bit of news. In other words, don't worry, it's not you, it's them, or at least the markets.

The point was driven home to me today by a new chart from the good folks at Bespoke. It shows the product of the frequency of 1% up/down days on a monthly basis dating back to 1946. In the current month we've had 8 up days over 1%, and 7 down days, so the product is 56. The maximum in any month is 144, but we've only gotten to 100 twice.

How has the market done after such violence cusps? Well, the average three-month post-event return for months reading over 50 is 4.4%, with positive returns 80% of the time. Fun.

[via Bespoke]

Joker: C'mon hit me. C'MON HIT ME!!!

-- Dark Knight (2008)

Gee, apparently I'm dead wrong in my Yahoo Finance video where I opine about Apple's weak back-to-school selling season. Darn. And I was so sure I was onto something.

Feel free to pile on, of course.

It's interesting to think about the effective, unhedged income cut to OPEC and non-OPEC oil exporters caused by the current collapse in crude oil prices. Recall, we have gone from a peak of $146 to a current price of something like $116.40.

The following table shows the amount per day by which the amount of money the U.S. sends to other countries, has fallen, assuming exporters were unhedged, and assuming the July peak had held constant. It's worth reminding yourself that many of the countries on this list actively dislike the U.S., so one could argue that sending them more money than you need to is a bad idea.

Ian Faith: The Boston gig has been canceled...
David St. Hubbins: What?
Ian Faith: Yeah. I wouldn't worry about it though, it's not a big college town.
        - Spinal Tap (1984)

In playing with Google Insight I started checking trends on entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship. Has that sort of thing become, you know, passe, since the dot-com bubble burst and the Web 2.0 thing is waning? Or is it growing, at least as evidenced by people's search behavior on Google?

Here is the result since 2004:

Interesting, non? Judging by searches related to entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship,  California isn't even in Google's (normalized) top ten across all states. The situation improves if you make the search to be just entrepreneurs, as opposed to both entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship, with California ascending to the #4 spot, but both are contrary to what you might think.

The obvious answer, assuming the algorithms are correct, is that Californians don't search for entrepreneurs/entrepreneurship as much as people in other states because they don't feel like they need to know. They think they have figured it out already, or they have someone to ask.

What it doesn't explain, however, is the presence of Massachusetts at the top of the list. The state is not exactly a stranger to entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship, but it is still beating a path to Google searches on the subject.

Other thoughts? And yes, I know this is a little wonky.

Rachel Lapp: You know carpentry. Can you do anything else?
John Book: Whacking. I'm hell at whacking.

           -- Witness (1985)

To turn the data around for a second in the prior post -- the one about the seeming anomaly in Google Insights results for entrepreneurial interest in California -- there is no denying that Google says California is fascinated with VCs.

Check the following figure, and note that California is right up there -- even if interest in VCs has waned by more than half from 2004 levels.