Oisigma/Blog
Research & notes

What the Oisigma Working Paper Does Not Cover

The published record for the Behavioral Transform Model is specific: a calibration result for an expected-range band, scored on daily closes. A reader deciding whether to rely on it should know the edges of that record as well as the figures inside it. This is the list of what has not been tested or published, drawn from the live pages. The methodology and limits post covers what the tests do show; this one covers what they leave out.

‍

What has not been tested?

Not covered What is published instead
Option-implied expected moves No coverage test; the band uses realized returns only
ATR, Keltner-multiple, Donchian or VWAP bands scored for coverage A (20, 2) Bollinger Bands® comparison only
Intraday on any instrument but SPY SPY only, inner band only, 15-minute floor
Small caps, non-U.S. single stocks, bond ETFs NVDA, AAPL, MSFT and a 79-stock U.S. draw
Spot gold (XAUUSD), WTI vs Brent separately Gold and oil futures rows
Any trading strategy, stop placement or sizing rule Nothing; the paper validates calibration only

‍

Where the right-hand column names a figure, it is on the Proof page as historical calibration; past behavior is not a guarantee of future results.

What does the paper itself not claim?

It is a working paper and has not been peer-reviewed, which the site states wherever it is cited. The Proof page shows 16 of the 40 instruments; the full table is in the paper. The paper validates the range's calibration, not the profitability of any use, and whether any use delivers value after real-world costs is an open question. The band is an expected range, not a claim that price reverses at its edges.

Where does the published band itself fall short?

Two limits are measured and published rather than omitted. The band runs too narrow in the first days of a fast volatility jump, with containment falling to about 65% on the most extreme crisis-onset days, and the outer band is slightly optimistic in the deep tails. When volatility bands fail covers both, and why we publish our methodology explains why the misses are listed next to the results.

Why publish a list of gaps?

Because a band makes a checkable claim, and a checkable claim is only as useful as its stated scope. A figure quoted outside the sample it was measured on is a different claim, one nobody has tested. The how to evaluate a paid indicator post makes the same point about any vendor: the question is what a tool has not been asked to do.

Frequently asked questions

Will untested instruments be added?

The live pages do not announce a roadmap, so this post makes no promise about future tests.

Does "not tested" mean the band does not work there?

No. It means no figure has been published, so no claim is made either way.

Is the 97-year figure for every instrument?

No. The 97-year sample is the S&P 500 cash index only; every other instrument has a shorter period, listed per row on the Proof page.

The paper is at oisigma.com/paper. The 30-day free trial lets you check the band against your own markets, inside and outside the published list: start free, cancel anytime.

‍

‍

Now, your charts

Curious how this looks on your charts?

Try it free for 30 days and see the range update as new bars print, on whatever symbols and timeframes you actually trade.

Start your free trial
Complete checkout
Read the paper

30 days free, then $15/mo. Cancel anytime from your account.

Pick up where you left off.