LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

Odaily星球日报Pubblicato 2024-02-08Pubblicato ultima volta 2024-02-08

Introduzione

在进行大类因子合成前,需要进行因子正交化来消除共线性,本篇就三种正交方法进行展开。

书接上回,关于《用多因子模型构建强大的加密资产投资组合》系列文章中,我们已经发布了四篇:《理论基础篇》《数据预处理篇》《因子有效性检验篇》《大类因子分析:因子合成篇》

在上一篇中,我们具体解释了因子共线性(因子之间相关性较高)的问题,在进行大类因子合成前,需要进行因子正交化来消除共线性。

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

一、因子正交化的数学推导

从多因子截面回归角度,建立因子正交化体系。

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

所以,

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

二、三种正交方法的具体实现

1.施密特正交

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

施密特正交是一种顺序正交方法,因此需要确定因子正交的顺序,常见的正交顺序有固定顺序(不同截面上取同样的正交次序),以及动态顺序(在每个截面上根据一定规则确定其正交次序)。施密特正交法的优点是按同样顺序正交的因子有显式的对应关系,但是正交顺序没有统一的选择标准,正交后的表现可能受到正交顺序标准和窗口期参数的影响。

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

2.规范正交

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)# 规范正交 def Canonical(self):
 overlapping_matrix = (time_tag_data.shape[ 1 ] - 1) * np.cov(time_tag_data.astype(float))
 # 获取特征值和特征向量
 eigenvalue, eigenvector = np.linalg.eig(overlapping_matrix)
 # 转换为 np 中的矩阵
 eigenvector = np.mat(eigenvector)
 transition_matrix = np.dot(eigenvector, np.mat(np.diag(eigenvalue ** (-0.5))))
 orthogonalization = np.dot(time_tag_data.T.values, transition_matrix)
 orthogonalization_df = pd.DataFrame(orthogonalization.T, index = pd.MultiIndex.from_product([time_tag_data.index, [time_tag]]), columns=time_tag_data.columns)
 self.factor_orthogonalization_data = self.factor_orthogonalization_data.append(orthogonalization_df)

3.对称正交

施密特正交由于在过去若干个截面上都取同样的因子正交顺序,因此正交后的因子和原始因子有显式的对应关系,而规范正交在每个截面上选取的主成分方向可能不一致,导致正交前后的因子没有稳定的对应关系。由此可见,正交后组合的效果,很大一部分取决于正交前后因子是否有稳定的对应关系。

对称正交尽可能的减少对原始因子矩阵的修改而得到一组正交基。这样能够最大程度地保持正交后因子和原因子的相似性。并且避免像施密特正交法中偏向正交顺序中靠前的因子。

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

对称正交的性质:

  1. 与施密特正交相比,对称正交不需要提供正交次序,对每个因子是平等看待的

  2. 在所有正交过渡矩阵中,对称正交后的矩阵和原始矩阵的相似性最大,即正交前后矩阵的距离最小。

LUCIDA:如何利用多因子策略构建强大的加密资产投资组合(因子正交化篇)

Letture associate

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

Vitalik Buterin's recent algorithmic stablecoin proposal envisions using an option-like mechanism to create a stablecoin without the liquidation risks inherent in traditional collateralized debt position (CDP) models. The design splits one unit of ETH into two components: a 'stable' leg (P) that maintains value up to a certain strike price, and an 'upside' leg (N) that captures any appreciation above that price. Together, they always sum to one ETH, eliminating the need for debt or liquidation mechanisms. From an options perspective, the stable leg essentially functions as a synthetic, covered call position. However, significant challenges exist. For the stable asset to maintain its peg, it must continuously roll deep in-the-money call options, leading to potential rollover slippage, predictable trading paths vulnerable to front-running, and liquidity issues. Crucially, the system's scalability depends on a constant demand for the upside leg—a form of leveraged ETH long position without funding rates or liquidation risk. It's unclear if such persistent, specific demand will materialize from speculators or market makers who have simpler alternatives like perpetual swaps. The author, drawing from experience with Rysk, argues that DeFi options have struggled as standalone trading products due to complexity and fragmented liquidity. Their potential lies instead as foundational infrastructure underpinning more complex financial primitives like stablecoins, structured yields, or index products—transforming from a direct product into a core pricing and risk distribution engine for the next generation of on-chain finance.

marsbit1 min fa

Vitalik's Algorithmic Stablecoin Vision: Interpreting the Mechanism and Challenges from an Options Perspective

marsbit1 min fa

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit2 h fa

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit2 h fa

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit3 h fa

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit3 h fa

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit3 h fa

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit3 h fa

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片