agentleFS
brainbytes-devbrainbytes-dev/everything-claude-trading/skills/strategies/event-driven/SKILL.md

event-driven

Skill16 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

name: event-driven description: Event-driven trading — earnings, M&A arb, index rebalancing, spin-offs. origin: ECT PEAD is the tendency for stock prices to drift in the direction of the earnings surprise for 60-90 days after the announcement. It is one of the most robust anomalies in finance. Merger arb involves buying the target and (in stock deals) shorting the acquirer after a deal announcement. When an index adds or removes a constituent, passive funds must buy or sell. This creates predictable…

6 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

2 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    When an index adds or removes a constituent, passive funds must buy or sell.

    line 79
  2. Distinctive:

    Before deploying an event-driven strategy:

    line 218

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Event-Driven Trading

name: event-driven description: Event-driven trading — earnings, M&A arb, index rebalancing, spin-offs. origin: ECT

When to Activate

  • User wants to trade around corporate events (earnings, M&A, spin-offs)
  • Designing a merger arbitrage or event arbitrage strategy
  • Evaluating index rebalancing trades (additions/deletions)
  • Analyzing post-earnings announcement drift (PEAD)
  • Building an event study framework for backtesting catalysts

First Questions

  1. Which event type (earnings, M&A, index rebalancing, spin-off, restructuring)?
  2. What asset class and geography (US equities, European credit, global futures)?
  3. Are you trading the pre-event anticipation or post-event drift?
  4. What is the target holding period (intraday, days, weeks)?
  5. Long-only, long-short, or hedged implementation?

Core Concepts

Post-Earnings Announcement Drift (PEAD)

PEAD is the tendency for stock prices to drift in the direction of the earnings surprise for 60-90 days after the announcement. It is one of the most robust anomalies in finance.

  • Standardized Unexpected Earnings (SUE): SUE = (EPS_actual - EPS_forecast) / std(forecast_errors)
  • Academic evidence: Ball and Brown (1968), Bernard and Thomas (1989)
  • Drift magnitude: top decile SUE outperforms bottom decile by 4-8% over 60 days
  • The anomaly persists because of underreaction to earnings news, analyst forecast stickiness, and investor inattention
  • Decay: strongest in first 5 days, continues for 60-90 days at diminishing rate
  • Enhanced by combining SUE with revenue surprise, guidance change, and earnings call tone

Merger Arbitrage

Merger arb involves buying the target and (in stock deals) shorting the acquirer after a deal announcement.

Cash deal:
  Spread = (Offer Price - Current Target Price) / Current Target Price
  Annualized = Spread * (365 / Expected Days to Close)

Stock deal:
  Long target shares, short (exchange ratio * acquirer shares)
  Spread = (Exchange Ratio * Acquirer Price - Target Price) / Target Price

Key variables:
  - Completion probability (80-95% for friendly deals, lower for hostile)
  - Time to close (3-12 months typical)
  - Break risk: downside if deal fails (target drops 20-40%)
  - Regulatory risk: antitrust review, CFIUS, sector-specific
  - Financing risk: leveraged buyouts sensitive to credit markets

Deal Completion Probability Estimation

Factors increasing completion probability:
  - Definitive agreement signed (vs. letter of intent)
  - Board recommendation (unanimous stronger)
  - Shareholder vote scheduled
  - Regulatory approvals received (HSR, EU Commission)
  - Financing committed (firm commitment letters)
  - Strategic rationale is clear

Factors decreasing completion probability:
  - Hostile bid without board support
  - Antitrust concerns (high HHI, concentrated market)
  - Cross-border regulatory complexity
  - Material adverse change (MAC) clauses triggered
  - Competing bidders (good for target price, bad for spread capture)
  - Financing contingencies in uncertain credit markets

Index Rebalancing Trades

When an index adds or removes a constituent, passive funds must buy or sell. This creates predictable demand imbalances.

S&P 500 additions:
  - Announced ~5 trading days before effective date
  - Addition stocks rise 3-7% between announcement and effective date
  - Part of the return reverses over the following 30 days
  - Volume spikes on effective date (index funds rebalance at close)

Strategy:
  - Buy on announcement day, sell on effective date (or day after)
  - Hedge market risk with index futures
  - Expected Sharpe per event: high, but only ~25-30 events/year

Russell reconstitution:
  - Annual in late June, based on market cap rankings
  - Largest rebalancing event globally (~$9T benchmarked)
  - Additions/deletions predictable 2-4 weeks in advance
  - Front-running is competitive; alpha has decayed over time

Spin-Off Investing

Corporate spin-offs create value through several mechanisms:

  • Forced selling: index funds sell spin-offs that fall below size thresholds
  • Neglect: small spin-offs receive no analyst coverage initially
  • Incentive alignment: management of spin-off gets equity-based comp tied to new entity
  • Operational focus: separated businesses can optimize independently
  • Historical returns: spin-offs outperform the market by 10-15% annualized in first 2 years (Cusatis, Miles, Woolridge 1993)

Event Study Methodology

Standard event study framework:
  1. Define event window: [-T1, +T2] around event date
  2. Define estimation window: [-T3, -T1] for normal return model
  3. Estimate normal returns: market model, Fama-French, or DGTW
  4. Compute abnormal return: AR_t = R_t - E[R_t]
  5. Cumulative abnormal return: CAR = sum(AR_t) over event window
  6. Test significance: t-stat = CAR / (sigma_AR * sqrt(T))

Statistical considerations:
  - Event-induced variance: use Boehmer, Musumeci, Poulsen (1991) test
  - Cross-sectional clustering: adjust standard errors when events cluster in time
  - Thin trading: use trade-to-trade returns for illiquid securities

Detailed Methodology

Special Situations Universe Screening

Daily screening criteria:
  Earnings:
    - Companies reporting within next 5 trading days
    - Filter: historical earnings surprise dispersion > threshold
    - Filter: options implied move vs historical average implied move

  M&A:
    - Announced deals with spread > risk-free rate + minimum premium
    - Filter: deal size, regulatory jurisdiction, financing type
    - Monitor: SEC filings (SC 13D, DEFM14A, HSR filings)

  Index changes:
    - Monitor index provider announcements (S&P, MSCI, FTSE Russell)
    - Predict changes using publicly known methodology and market cap data

  Spin-offs:
    - SEC Form 10 filings (registration of new entity)
    - When-issued trading begins (price discovery opportunity)
    - Filter: spin-off size, sector, management incentive structure

Merger Arb Portfolio Construction

Position sizing:
  Kelly fraction: f* = (p * payoff - (1-p) * loss) / payoff
  Where:
    p = completion probability
    payoff = spread if deal closes
    loss = downside if deal breaks

  Practical sizing:
    Half-Kelly or less for single deals
    Maximum 5-8% of portfolio in any single deal
    Diversify across 15-30 concurrent deals

  Hedging:
    Market hedge: short index futures for portfolio beta
    Sector hedge: short sector ETF for sector-specific risk
    Rate hedge: duration-match for rate-sensitive deals

Earnings Drift Strategy

Signal construction:
  1. Compute SUE = (EPS_actual - EPS_consensus) / historical_std
  2. Normalize across universe (z-score)
  3. Combine with: revenue surprise, guidance revision, estimate revision breadth
  4. Enter position: close of earnings day or next open
  5. Hold: 5-60 days (shorter for liquid large-cap, longer for small-cap)
  6. Exit: fixed holding period or next earnings cycle

Enhancement signals:
  - Earnings call NLP sentiment (FinBERT or LLM-based)
  - Insider buying/selling post-earnings
  - Short interest changes
  - Options flow (unusual activity)
  - Analyst revision speed (fast revisors vs slow)

Risk Management for Event-Driven

Key risks by strategy:
  PEAD:
    - Crowding: many quant funds trade PEAD, alpha has decayed
    - Restatement risk: earnings later revised
    - Sector concentration: earnings cluster by sector

  Merger arb:
    - Deal break: 5-20% of deals fail, causing 20-40% loss on position
    - Correlation: multiple deals break in market stress (2008: 15 deals broke)
    - Liquidity: target stock liquidity dries up if deal is in doubt

  Index rebalancing:
    - Front-running competition: many participants, shrinking alpha
    - Implementation shortfall: large trades move prices

  Spin-offs:
    - Illiquidity: small spin-offs may have limited float
    - Information vacuum: limited financial history for new entity

Quality Gate

Before deploying an event-driven strategy:

  • Event definition is precise and unambiguous (exact timestamp, data source)
  • Look-ahead bias eliminated (use point-in-time announcement dates, not ex-post)
  • Survivorship bias addressed (include delisted targets, failed deals)
  • Transaction costs modeled realistically (earnings drift has high urgency cost)
  • Capacity assessed (event-driven strategies are inherently capacity-constrained)
  • Deal break scenarios stress-tested (2008 scenario: multiple concurrent breaks)
  • Correlation across concurrent positions analyzed (deals correlated in crises)
  • Slippage on event-day entries estimated (earnings releases cause wide spreads)
  • Holding period optimized with out-of-sample validation
  • Regulatory compliance verified (insider trading rules, position disclosure)

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.