Author: NingNing By 2025, we had experienced less than four complete four-year cycles. However, basic statistical knowledge tells us that any conclusions drawn from extremely small statistical sample sizes (only three valid data points) require careful verification, rather than simple blind faith. In predicting large market cycles with small samples, the Bayesian probability method for deriving the correlation between 25Q4 and 19Q4 is more valuable than the four-year cycle theory. The 25Q4 criterion for 19Q4 can be converted into Bayesian formula notation: P(Bear Market | Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation) = [P(Bear Market) / P(Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation)] * (P(Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation | Bear Market)) Bayesian probability parameter estimation P (Bear Market) - Prior Probability Since 1929: The S&P 500 has experienced 27 bear markets. Average frequency: once every 3.5 years Annual probability: Approximately 28.6% Quarterly probability (Q4-Q1 span): Approximately 15-20% Conservative estimate: P (bear market) ≈ 18% P(Stagflation → Recession) - Merrill Lynch Clock Transition Probability Historical probability of transition from stagflation to recession: The stagflation of the 1970s ultimately led to three recessions in 1973-74, 1980, and 1981-82. 2000-2001: The bursting of the tech bubble and a mild recession 2007-2008: Financial crisis, deep recession 2011-2012: European debt crisis, not fully recovered (avoided) 2018-2019: Trade war concerns, successful soft landing Statistical estimation: There have been approximately six "stagflation → recession" scenarios in the past 50 years. Four of them turned into a recession (66%). Two soft landings (34%) Current environment adjustments: The Federal Reserve actively cut interest rates (vs. passively raised interest rates in the 1970s). Labor market resilience (vs. 2008 financial systemic risk) Tariff policy uncertainty Global pressure to de-dollarize Estimated: P(stagflation → recession) ≈ 40-50% (median 45%) P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) - Likelihood Probability Under the condition of a bear market, the probability of experiencing "stagflation → recession": Historical bear market classification: Recession-type bear markets (12 times): 1929, 1937, 1973-74, 1980, 1981-82, 1990, 2000-02, 2007-09, 2020, 2022 Non-recessionary bear markets (15 times): Other technical corrections In 12 recession-type bear markets: Periods that experienced stagflation: 1973-74, 1980, 1981-82, 2007-08 (approximately 4 times). Those that did not experience stagflation: 1929 (deflation), 2020 (pandemic impact), 2022 (pure inflation). Estimated: P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) ≈ 33% Bayesian computation Standard formula: P(Bear Market | Stagflation → Recession) = P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) × P(Bear Market) / P(Stagflation → Recession) = 0.33 × 0.18 / 0.45 = 0.0594 / 0.45 = 0.132 = 13.2% Scenario Analysis Matrix Key Difference Analysis: Why is the probability low? Overall Conclusion P(25Q4-26Q1 Bear Market) ≈ 15-20% Confidence interval: Lower limit (optimistic): 12% Median (benchmark): 17% Upper limit (pessimistic): 25% Strategy Tactical defense is needed, not strategic retreat.Author: NingNing By 2025, we had experienced less than four complete four-year cycles. However, basic statistical knowledge tells us that any conclusions drawn from extremely small statistical sample sizes (only three valid data points) require careful verification, rather than simple blind faith. In predicting large market cycles with small samples, the Bayesian probability method for deriving the correlation between 25Q4 and 19Q4 is more valuable than the four-year cycle theory. The 25Q4 criterion for 19Q4 can be converted into Bayesian formula notation: P(Bear Market | Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation) = [P(Bear Market) / P(Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation)] * (P(Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation | Bear Market)) Bayesian probability parameter estimation P (Bear Market) - Prior Probability Since 1929: The S&P 500 has experienced 27 bear markets. Average frequency: once every 3.5 years Annual probability: Approximately 28.6% Quarterly probability (Q4-Q1 span): Approximately 15-20% Conservative estimate: P (bear market) ≈ 18% P(Stagflation → Recession) - Merrill Lynch Clock Transition Probability Historical probability of transition from stagflation to recession: The stagflation of the 1970s ultimately led to three recessions in 1973-74, 1980, and 1981-82. 2000-2001: The bursting of the tech bubble and a mild recession 2007-2008: Financial crisis, deep recession 2011-2012: European debt crisis, not fully recovered (avoided) 2018-2019: Trade war concerns, successful soft landing Statistical estimation: There have been approximately six "stagflation → recession" scenarios in the past 50 years. Four of them turned into a recession (66%). Two soft landings (34%) Current environment adjustments: The Federal Reserve actively cut interest rates (vs. passively raised interest rates in the 1970s). Labor market resilience (vs. 2008 financial systemic risk) Tariff policy uncertainty Global pressure to de-dollarize Estimated: P(stagflation → recession) ≈ 40-50% (median 45%) P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) - Likelihood Probability Under the condition of a bear market, the probability of experiencing "stagflation → recession": Historical bear market classification: Recession-type bear markets (12 times): 1929, 1937, 1973-74, 1980, 1981-82, 1990, 2000-02, 2007-09, 2020, 2022 Non-recessionary bear markets (15 times): Other technical corrections In 12 recession-type bear markets: Periods that experienced stagflation: 1973-74, 1980, 1981-82, 2007-08 (approximately 4 times). Those that did not experience stagflation: 1929 (deflation), 2020 (pandemic impact), 2022 (pure inflation). Estimated: P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) ≈ 33% Bayesian computation Standard formula: P(Bear Market | Stagflation → Recession) = P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) × P(Bear Market) / P(Stagflation → Recession) = 0.33 × 0.18 / 0.45 = 0.0594 / 0.45 = 0.132 = 13.2% Scenario Analysis Matrix Key Difference Analysis: Why is the probability low? Overall Conclusion P(25Q4-26Q1 Bear Market) ≈ 15-20% Confidence interval: Lower limit (optimistic): 12% Median (benchmark): 17% Upper limit (pessimistic): 25% Strategy Tactical defense is needed, not strategic retreat.

Why might the "four-year cycle theory" be wrong? Using Bayes' theorem to calculate market risk at the end of 2025.

2025/11/10 20:00

Author: NingNing

By 2025, we had experienced less than four complete four-year cycles. However, basic statistical knowledge tells us that any conclusions drawn from extremely small statistical sample sizes (only three valid data points) require careful verification, rather than simple blind faith.

In predicting large market cycles with small samples, the Bayesian probability method for deriving the correlation between 25Q4 and 19Q4 is more valuable than the four-year cycle theory.

The 25Q4 criterion for 19Q4 can be converted into Bayesian formula notation: P(Bear Market | Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation) = [P(Bear Market) / P(Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation)] * (P(Merrill Lynch Clock Stagflation | Bear Market))

Bayesian probability parameter estimation

P (Bear Market) - Prior Probability

Since 1929: The S&P 500 has experienced 27 bear markets.

Average frequency: once every 3.5 years

Annual probability: Approximately 28.6%

Quarterly probability (Q4-Q1 span): Approximately 15-20%

Conservative estimate: P (bear market) ≈ 18%

P(Stagflation → Recession) - Merrill Lynch Clock Transition Probability

Historical probability of transition from stagflation to recession:

The stagflation of the 1970s ultimately led to three recessions in 1973-74, 1980, and 1981-82.

2000-2001: The bursting of the tech bubble and a mild recession

2007-2008: Financial crisis, deep recession

2011-2012: European debt crisis, not fully recovered (avoided)

2018-2019: Trade war concerns, successful soft landing

Statistical estimation:

There have been approximately six "stagflation → recession" scenarios in the past 50 years.

Four of them turned into a recession (66%).

Two soft landings (34%)

Current environment adjustments:

The Federal Reserve actively cut interest rates (vs. passively raised interest rates in the 1970s).

Labor market resilience (vs. 2008 financial systemic risk)

Tariff policy uncertainty

Global pressure to de-dollarize

Estimated: P(stagflation → recession) ≈ 40-50% (median 45%)

P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) - Likelihood Probability

Under the condition of a bear market, the probability of experiencing "stagflation → recession":

Historical bear market classification:

Recession-type bear markets (12 times): 1929, 1937, 1973-74, 1980, 1981-82, 1990, 2000-02, 2007-09, 2020, 2022

Non-recessionary bear markets (15 times): Other technical corrections

In 12 recession-type bear markets:

Periods that experienced stagflation: 1973-74, 1980, 1981-82, 2007-08 (approximately 4 times).

Those that did not experience stagflation: 1929 (deflation), 2020 (pandemic impact), 2022 (pure inflation).

Estimated: P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) ≈ 33%

Bayesian computation

Standard formula:

P(Bear Market | Stagflation → Recession) = P(Stagflation → Recession | Bear Market) × P(Bear Market) / P(Stagflation → Recession)

= 0.33 × 0.18 / 0.45

= 0.0594 / 0.45

= 0.132 = 13.2%

Scenario Analysis Matrix

Key Difference Analysis: Why is the probability low?

Overall Conclusion

P(25Q4-26Q1 Bear Market) ≈ 15-20%

Confidence interval:

Lower limit (optimistic): 12%

Median (benchmark): 17%

Upper limit (pessimistic): 25%

Strategy

Tactical defense is needed, not strategic retreat.

Market Opportunity
Moonveil Logo
Moonveil Price(MORE)
$0.002473
$0.002473$0.002473
-1.11%
USD
Moonveil (MORE) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Is Doge Losing Steam As Traders Choose Pepeto For The Best Crypto Investment?

Is Doge Losing Steam As Traders Choose Pepeto For The Best Crypto Investment?

The post Is Doge Losing Steam As Traders Choose Pepeto For The Best Crypto Investment? appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Crypto News 17 September 2025 | 17:39 Is dogecoin really fading? As traders hunt the best crypto to buy now and weigh 2025 picks, Dogecoin (DOGE) still owns the meme coin spotlight, yet upside looks capped, today’s Dogecoin price prediction says as much. Attention is shifting to projects that blend culture with real on-chain tools. Buyers searching “best crypto to buy now” want shipped products, audits, and transparent tokenomics. That frames the true matchup: dogecoin vs. Pepeto. Enter Pepeto (PEPETO), an Ethereum-based memecoin with working rails: PepetoSwap, a zero-fee DEX, plus Pepeto Bridge for smooth cross-chain moves. By fusing story with tools people can use now, and speaking directly to crypto presale 2025 demand, Pepeto puts utility, clarity, and distribution in front. In a market where legacy meme coin leaders risk drifting on sentiment, Pepeto’s execution gives it a real seat in the “best crypto to buy now” debate. First, a quick look at why dogecoin may be losing altitude. Dogecoin Price Prediction: Is Doge Really Fading? Remember when dogecoin made crypto feel simple? In 2013, DOGE turned a meme into money and a loose forum into a movement. A decade on, the nonstop momentum has cooled; the backdrop is different, and the market is far more selective. With DOGE circling ~$0.268, the tape reads bearish-to-neutral for the next few weeks: hold the $0.26 shelf on daily closes and expect choppy range-trading toward $0.29–$0.30 where rallies keep stalling; lose $0.26 decisively and momentum often bleeds into $0.245 with risk of a deeper probe toward $0.22–$0.21; reclaim $0.30 on a clean daily close and the downside bias is likely neutralized, opening room for a squeeze into the low-$0.30s. Source: CoinMarketcap / TradingView Beyond the dogecoin price prediction, DOGE still centers on payments and lacks native smart contracts; ZK-proof verification is proposed,…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:14
Fed Decides On Interest Rates Today—Here’s What To Watch For

Fed Decides On Interest Rates Today—Here’s What To Watch For

The post Fed Decides On Interest Rates Today—Here’s What To Watch For appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Topline The Federal Reserve on Wednesday will conclude a two-day policymaking meeting and release a decision on whether to lower interest rates—following months of pressure and criticism from President Donald Trump—and potentially signal whether additional cuts are on the way. President Donald Trump has urged the central bank to “CUT INTEREST RATES, NOW, AND BIGGER” than they might plan to. Getty Images Key Facts The central bank is poised to cut interest rates by at least a quarter-point, down from the 4.25% to 4.5% range where they have been held since December to between 4% and 4.25%, as Wall Street has placed 100% odds of a rate cut, according to CME’s FedWatch, with higher odds (94%) on a quarter-point cut than a half-point (6%) reduction. Fed governors Christopher Waller and Michelle Bowman, both Trump appointees, voted in July for a quarter-point reduction to rates, and they may dissent again in favor of a large cut alongside Stephen Miran, Trump’s Council of Economic Advisers’ chair, who was sworn in at the meeting’s start on Tuesday. It’s unclear whether other policymakers, including Kansas City Fed President Jeffrey Schmid and St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem, will favor larger cuts or opt for no reduction. Fed Chair Jerome Powell said in his Jackson Hole, Wyoming, address last month the central bank would likely consider a looser monetary policy, noting the “shifting balance of risks” on the U.S. economy “may warrant adjusting our policy stance.” David Mericle, an economist for Goldman Sachs, wrote in a note the “key question” for the Fed’s meeting is whether policymakers signal “this is likely the first in a series of consecutive cuts” as the central bank is anticipated to “acknowledge the softening in the labor market,” though they may not “nod to an October cut.” Mericle said he…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:23
Coinbase Joins Ethereum Foundation to Back Open Intents Framework

Coinbase Joins Ethereum Foundation to Back Open Intents Framework

Coinbase Payments has joined the Open Intents Framework as a core contributor, working alongside Ethereum Foundation and other major players. The initiative aims to simplify complex multi-chain interactions through automated solver technology. The post Coinbase Joins Ethereum Foundation to Back Open Intents Framework appeared first on Coinspeaker.
Share
Coinspeaker2025/09/18 02:43