Behavioral economics already proved that emotions affect individual decision making. This project will be testing whether the measurement of the mood of Wikipedia edits history correlates to the change of stock price.
The project can be divided into four parts: sentiment analysis of Wikipedia edits history , generating the financial data from NYSE, visualizing the correlation between sentiment analysis and stock price, predicting the future stock price by providing a sentiment analysis value. 10 sample companies will be analyzed in this project. These 10 sample companies are from the top 10 controversial companies list on 2015 CRN report and Entrepreneur. These 10 sample companies are: British Petroleum, Oracle Corporation, VMware, Hewlett-Packard, HSBC, Sony, JetBlue, General Motor, Microsoft and Target. The time span of WikiPedia edits history and financial data is from January 1st, 2014 to July 1st, 2016. The sentiment analysis has three levels: positive, negative and neutral. Each level will be assigned a numerical value: 1 for positive, -1 for negative and 0 for neutral. Hence, the analysis will be focusing on the correlation between average sentiment value of WikiPedia edits history and stock price of given companies.
If there exists a strong correlation between the measurement of the mood of Wikipedia edits history and the change of stock price, then companies should be able to predict the future stock price change and get benefit from it.
The consortium started on September 15, 2015 with 9 financial companies: Barclays, BBVA, Commonwealth Bank of Australia, Credit Suisse, Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan, Royal Bank of Scotland, State Street, and UBS.
On September 29, 2015 an additional 13 financial companies joined: Bank of America, BNY Mellon, Citi, Commerzbank, Deutsche Bank, HSBC, Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Morgan Stanley, National Australia Bank, Royal Bank of Canada, Skandinaviska Enskilda Banken, Société Générale, and Toronto-Dominion Bank. Financial Times reporter Kadhim Shubber wrote that the new additions are "a sign the industry is gathering behind R3 in one potential implementation of the distributed ledger technology behind the currency bitcoin."
On December 17, 2015, an additional 12 financial companies joined : BMO Financial Group, Danske Bank, Intesa Sanpaolo, Natixis, Nomura, Northern Trust, OP Financial Group, Banco Santander, Scotiabank, Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation, U.S. Bancorpand Westpac Banking Corporation.
As of April 25, 2016, three additional financial companies had joined: SBI Holdings of Japan, Hana Financial of South Korea, and Bank Itau of Brazil.
As of June 23, 2016, Toyota Financial Services has joined.
The bank-backed R3 blockchain consortium has expanded its partnership network to the market data business, recruiting Thomson Reuters as a new member.Mark Rodrigues, MD, strategic customers and solutions, Thomson Reuters, says the firm has been collaborating with customers on blockchain and distributed ledger initiatives and proof-of-concept projects for some time.
“This is the year of pointless blockchain projects” and anything you build with blockchain will need to be ripped out and replaced within 18 months, according to Gartner fellow Ray Valdes.
Speaking to The Register in Sydney today, Valdes said blockchain is among the most secure technologies he's ever seen, having survived seven years at the heart of bitcoin. But he said the technology remain immature and is often misrepresented. Some “implementations” he's seen have nothing to do with blockchain and instead represent “blockchain washing” in which projects involving integration and security are labelled as having something to do with blockchain, just as legacy IT scored “private cloud” labels in the early 2010s.
Plenty of other projects he's seen can best be described as “blockchain tourism”, as they are small scale proof of concepts that don't touch core systems.
Others he's seen see teams bogged down in complex integration projects turn to blockchain as an act of “wishful thinking for magic middleware.” Such efforts predictably fail.
He's also seen blockchain projects conducted in closed environments, which he thinks is futile because the whole point of the technology is to build a network of trust. If you're only going to run blockchain on one machine, he asks why you wouldn't just use a database that is already very good at recording transactions.
IBM and Microsoft's blockchain-as-a-service efforts confuse him for the same reason. The whole point of the technology is that the network collectively makes transactions trustworthy, yet Microsoft and IBM are offering themselves up as centralised blockchain hubs. In private, Valdes says Microsoft will say its blockchain effort is to help developers understand the technology. Real implementations can wait.
Valdes says it's futile trying to pick winners in blockchain, because it's at a stage similar to the Web in 1995, a time when the first wave of innovators started to build services and win millions of customers. Just as the likes of Lycos and Magellan were surpassed by Google, and early social networks were swamped by Facebook, Valdes believes the world's dominant blockchain concerns will emerge in a second wave of innovation that takes place years from now.
But the analyst was at pains to say he is not recommending against experimentation. He's convinced blockchain will be important, but equally sure that anything you do with it now will be a learning experience rather than game-changer for your organisation. ®