Searcharxiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2609.12477

Large Signal Libraries: Equal-Weight Limits and the Divergent Spectra of Signals and PnL

Abstract

An ensemble of roughly 3,000 signals over 20 assets was reported to have approximately 90% correlation with the leading component of the asset-space return structure. Does having about 158 signals per available linear dimension explain that alignment? The population answer depends on the research process's design distribution and its relation to returns: crowding alone imposes neither a nonzero mean nor agreement with a principal component. The population theory developed here distinguishes four objects: the equal-weight signal, signal principal components, equal-weight profit and loss (PnL), and PnL principal components. The return operator in the motivating observation is a separate object. Independent libraries converge to their design mean; exchangeable libraries can retain a random conditional mean. Cross-sectional signals over $d$ assets, once demeaned and normalized, lie on the unit sphere $S^{q-1}$ of a $q$-dimensional space, $q=d-1$. Under axial symmetry, their nonzero mean is signal-cloud PC1 exactly when its longitudinal second moment exceeds $1/q$, the isotropic energy share. Residual-and-gap bounds quantify approximate alignment. Combining design weights into signals contracts the tangent of their angle to PC1 to at most $\sqrt{λ_2/λ_1}$ times its value, where $λ_1>λ_2$ are the leading signal-kernel eigenvalues; the factor is sharp. A target-aligned frame separates transverse signal geometry, which PnL discards, from dispersion weighting and temporal centering, which also change the spectrum. A reproducible synthetic example illustrates the geometric threshold, and a proposed empirical program separates library growth from limited-history estimation. No market-data empirical results are presented.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Marc da Costa Nunes. 2026-09-11. Large Signal Libraries: Equal-Weight Limits and the Divergent Spectra of Signals and PnL. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.12477

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Conditional value-at-risk under reward-penalty mechanism with applications to robust portfolio management

In this paper, we present robust portfolio selection models by incorporating a reward and penalty mechanism into portfolio management. We assume that the joint distribution of the losses of the underlying risky assets in a portfolio is uncertain but lies within a multivariate distribution set. Our goal is to identify optimal portfolio allocations by minimizing the worst-case conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) of portfolio loss under the reward and penalty mechanism and distribution uncertainty. Our models can also be used to investigate the problem of how to balance portfolio losses with their associated downside risk in portfolio management. We first derive an explicit closed-form expression for the worst-case CVaR under the reward-penalty mechanism, which generalizes several existing models and results regarding the worst-case CVaR, such as those studied in Jagannathan (1977), Chen et al. (2011), and Cai et al. (2024). We then apply this expression to obtain optimal portfolio allocations that minimize the worst-case CVaR under both a classical mean-covariance-based multivariate distribution set and a generalized mean-covariance-based multivariate distribution set introduced in Kang et al. (2019). Additionally, we utilize real market data to illustrate the application of the proposed models and the corresponding optimal portfolio allocations in portfolio management. Our empirical experiments show that portfolios based on the proposed models have the potential to outperform those based on several existing related models. Furthermore, the results demonstrate that incorporating downside risk into portfolio loss helps better manage risk and can achieve higher investment returns than considering either downside risk or portfolio loss alone. Moreover, our experiments reveal the trade-off between improving expected portfolio return and controlling the worst-case portfolio CVaR.

q-fin.PM↗

Exponential investors with weakly mean-reverting prices

We investigate a continuous-time financial market where the asset price exhibits weak (sublinear) mean reversion and has a nonzero drift. Complementing earlier work on strong (superlinear) mean reversion, we show that, for an investor maximizing expected exponential utility, the certainty equivalent grows as $O(T^{2β+1})$ where $0<β<1$ is the strength of mean reversion. An explicit asymptotically optimal strategy is also given.

q-fin.PM↗