Financial Astrology Methods Compared | Bullion Signals
Research

We studied financial astrology before we built anything.

Financial astrology is not one method. It is a set of competing schools, each with its own inputs, time horizon and way of delivering results. We reviewed the most established of them, tested their core inputs against gold market data, and built our engine from the parts that held up.

Seven approaches, reviewed

For each school: how it works, how it reaches readers, what we took from it, and why it cannot stand alone.

{{ s.n }}

{{ s.name }}

{{ s.how }}

Typical delivery
{{ s.delivery }}
What we took
{{ s.took }}
Why not alone
{{ s.why }}
Table mapping each of the seven schools reviewed to what was kept in the model: technical confirmation, Natal Transit Score, Event Strip timing, macro events and news, numeric scoring, AstroPlanetary ephemeris, and declination evaluated but not used.
From seven schools to one engine: what each approach became in the model. Tap or click the image to enlarge.

How we tested

Each approach's inputs were turned into a numeric score and run against a 90-day walk-forward window of gold price and macro history. A layer stayed only if it added information out of sample, after the macro and technical layers were already in the model.

Walk-forward test schematic: a fitting window on past gold and macro history followed by a 90-day test window, rolled forward in four steps; each candidate layer is kept only if it adds information out of sample after the macro and technical layers.
How each layer was tested: a rolling 90-day walk-forward window, and a keep-or-drop rule for every candidate layer. Tap or click the image to enlarge.
No single school explained gold on its own. The combination did better than any one part.

That is why the index blends five layers instead of following one method, and combines them with a weighted score.

See the methodology