{
  "schemaVersion": "1.0",
  "item": {
    "slug": "us-market-bubble-detector",
    "name": "Us Market Bubble Detector",
    "source": "tencent",
    "type": "skill",
    "category": "效率提升",
    "sourceUrl": "https://clawhub.ai/Veeramanikandanr48/us-market-bubble-detector",
    "canonicalUrl": "https://clawhub.ai/Veeramanikandanr48/us-market-bubble-detector",
    "targetPlatform": "OpenClaw"
  },
  "install": {
    "downloadMode": "redirect",
    "downloadUrl": "/downloads/us-market-bubble-detector",
    "sourceDownloadUrl": "https://wry-manatee-359.convex.site/api/v1/download?slug=us-market-bubble-detector",
    "sourcePlatform": "tencent",
    "targetPlatform": "OpenClaw",
    "installMethod": "Manual import",
    "extraction": "Extract archive",
    "prerequisites": [
      "OpenClaw"
    ],
    "packageFormat": "ZIP package",
    "includedAssets": [
      "CHANGELOG.md",
      "SKILL.md",
      "references/bubble_framework.md",
      "references/historical_cases.md",
      "references/implementation_guide.md",
      "references/quick_reference.md"
    ],
    "primaryDoc": "SKILL.md",
    "quickSetup": [
      "Download the package from Yavira.",
      "Extract the archive and review SKILL.md first.",
      "Import or place the package into your OpenClaw setup."
    ],
    "agentAssist": {
      "summary": "Hand the extracted package to your coding agent with a concrete install brief instead of figuring it out manually.",
      "steps": [
        "Download the package from Yavira.",
        "Extract it into a folder your agent can access.",
        "Paste one of the prompts below and point your agent at the extracted folder."
      ],
      "prompts": [
        {
          "label": "New install",
          "body": "I downloaded a skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder and install it by following the included instructions. Tell me what you changed and call out any manual steps you could not complete."
        },
        {
          "label": "Upgrade existing",
          "body": "I downloaded an updated skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder, compare it with my current installation, and upgrade it while preserving any custom configuration unless the package docs explicitly say otherwise. Summarize what changed and any follow-up checks I should run."
        }
      ]
    },
    "sourceHealth": {
      "source": "tencent",
      "status": "healthy",
      "reason": "direct_download_ok",
      "recommendedAction": "download",
      "checkedAt": "2026-04-30T16:55:25.780Z",
      "expiresAt": "2026-05-07T16:55:25.780Z",
      "httpStatus": 200,
      "finalUrl": "https://wry-manatee-359.convex.site/api/v1/download?slug=network",
      "contentType": "application/zip",
      "probeMethod": "head",
      "details": {
        "probeUrl": "https://wry-manatee-359.convex.site/api/v1/download?slug=network",
        "contentDisposition": "attachment; filename=\"network-1.0.0.zip\"",
        "redirectLocation": null,
        "bodySnippet": null
      },
      "scope": "source",
      "summary": "Source download looks usable.",
      "detail": "Yavira can redirect you to the upstream package for this source.",
      "primaryActionLabel": "Download for OpenClaw",
      "primaryActionHref": "/downloads/us-market-bubble-detector"
    },
    "validation": {
      "installChecklist": [
        "Use the Yavira download entry.",
        "Review SKILL.md after the package is downloaded.",
        "Confirm the extracted package contains the expected setup assets."
      ],
      "postInstallChecks": [
        "Confirm the extracted package includes the expected docs or setup files.",
        "Validate the skill or prompts are available in your target agent workspace.",
        "Capture any manual follow-up steps the agent could not complete."
      ]
    },
    "downloadPageUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/downloads/us-market-bubble-detector",
    "agentPageUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/us-market-bubble-detector/agent",
    "manifestUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/us-market-bubble-detector/agent.json",
    "briefUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/us-market-bubble-detector/agent.md"
  },
  "agentAssist": {
    "summary": "Hand the extracted package to your coding agent with a concrete install brief instead of figuring it out manually.",
    "steps": [
      "Download the package from Yavira.",
      "Extract it into a folder your agent can access.",
      "Paste one of the prompts below and point your agent at the extracted folder."
    ],
    "prompts": [
      {
        "label": "New install",
        "body": "I downloaded a skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder and install it by following the included instructions. Tell me what you changed and call out any manual steps you could not complete."
      },
      {
        "label": "Upgrade existing",
        "body": "I downloaded an updated skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder, compare it with my current installation, and upgrade it while preserving any custom configuration unless the package docs explicitly say otherwise. Summarize what changed and any follow-up checks I should run."
      }
    ]
  },
  "documentation": {
    "source": "clawhub",
    "primaryDoc": "SKILL.md",
    "sections": [
      {
        "title": "Key Revisions in v2.1",
        "body": "Critical Changes from v2.0:\n\n✅ Mandatory Quantitative Data Collection - Use measured values, not impressions or speculation\n✅ Clear Threshold Settings - Specific numerical criteria for each indicator\n✅ Two-Phase Evaluation Process - Quantitative evaluation → Qualitative adjustment (strict order)\n✅ Stricter Qualitative Criteria - Max +3 points (reduced from +5), requires measurable evidence\n✅ Confirmation Bias Prevention - Explicit checklist to avoid over-scoring\n✅ Granular Risk Phases - Added \"Elevated Risk\" phase (8-9 points) for nuanced risk management"
      },
      {
        "title": "When to Use This Skill",
        "body": "Use this skill when:\n\nEnglish:\n\nUser asks \"Is the market in a bubble?\" or \"Are we in a bubble?\"\nUser seeks advice on profit-taking, new entry timing, or short-selling decisions\nUser reports social phenomena (non-investors entering, media frenzy, IPO flood)\nUser mentions narratives like \"this time is different\" or \"revolutionary technology\" becoming mainstream\nUser consults about risk management for existing positions\n\nJapanese:\n\nユーザーが「今の相場はバブルか?」と尋ねる\n投資の利確・新規参入・空売りのタイミング判断を求める\n社会現象(非投資家の参入、メディア過熱、IPO氾濫)を観察し懸念を表明\n「今回は違う」「革命的技術」などの物語が主流化している状況を報告\n保有ポジションのリスク管理方法を相談"
      },
      {
        "title": "Phase 1: Mandatory Quantitative Data Collection",
        "body": "CRITICAL: Always collect the following data before starting evaluation\n\n1.1 Market Structure Data (Highest Priority)\n\n□ Put/Call Ratio (CBOE Equity P/C)\n  - Source: CBOE DataShop or web_search \"CBOE put call ratio\"\n  - Collect: 5-day moving average\n\n□ VIX (Fear Index)\n  - Source: Yahoo Finance ^VIX or web_search \"VIX current\"\n  - Collect: Current value + percentile over past 3 months\n\n□ Volatility Indicators\n  - 21-day realized volatility\n  - Historical position of VIX (determine if in bottom 10th percentile)\n\n1.2 Leverage & Positioning Data\n\n□ FINRA Margin Debt Balance\n  - Source: web_search \"FINRA margin debt latest\"\n  - Collect: Latest month + Year-over-Year % change\n\n□ Breadth (Market Participation)\n  - % of S&P 500 stocks above 50-day MA\n  - Source: web_search \"S&P 500 breadth 50 day moving average\"\n\n1.3 IPO & New Issuance Data\n\n□ IPO Count & First-Day Performance\n  - Source: Renaissance Capital IPO or web_search \"IPO market 2025\"\n  - Collect: Quarterly count + median first-day return\n\n⚠️ CRITICAL: Do NOT proceed with evaluation without Phase 1 data collection"
      },
      {
        "title": "Phase 2: Quantitative Evaluation (Quantitative Scoring)",
        "body": "Score mechanically based on collected data using the following criteria:\n\nIndicator 1: Put/Call Ratio (Market Sentiment)\n\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: P/C < 0.70 (excessive optimism, call-heavy)\n- 1 point: P/C 0.70-0.85 (slightly optimistic)\n- 0 points: P/C > 0.85 (healthy caution)\n\nRationale: P/C < 0.7 is historically characteristic of bubble periods\n\nIndicator 2: Volatility Suppression + New Highs\n\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: VIX < 12 AND major index within 5% of 52-week high\n- 1 point: VIX 12-15 AND near highs\n- 0 points: VIX > 15 OR more than 10% from highs\n\nRationale: Extreme low volatility + highs indicates excessive complacency\n\nIndicator 3: Leverage (Margin Debt Balance)\n\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: YoY +20% or more AND all-time high\n- 1 point: YoY +10-20%\n- 0 points: YoY +10% or less OR negative\n\nRationale: Rapid leverage increase is a bubble precursor\n\nIndicator 4: IPO Market Overheating\n\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: Quarterly IPO count > 2x 5-year average AND median first-day return +20%+\n- 1 point: Quarterly IPO count > 1.5x 5-year average\n- 0 points: Normal levels\n\nRationale: Poor-quality IPO flood is characteristic of late-stage bubbles\n\nIndicator 5: Breadth Anomaly (Narrow Leadership)\n\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: New high AND < 45% of stocks above 50DMA (narrow leadership)\n- 1 point: 45-60% above 50DMA (somewhat narrow)\n- 0 points: > 60% above 50DMA (healthy breadth)\n\nRationale: Rally driven by few stocks is fragile\n\nIndicator 6: Price Acceleration\n\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: Past 3-month return exceeds 95th percentile of past 10 years\n- 1 point: Past 3-month return in 85-95th percentile of past 10 years\n- 0 points: Below 85th percentile\n\nRationale: Rapid price acceleration is unsustainable"
      },
      {
        "title": "Phase 3: Qualitative Adjustment (REVISED v2.1)",
        "body": "Limit: +3 points maximum (REDUCED from +5 in v2.0)\n\n⚠️ CONFIRMATION BIAS PREVENTION CHECKLIST:\n\nBefore adding ANY qualitative points:\n□ Do I have concrete, measurable data? (not impressions)\n□ Would an independent observer reach the same conclusion?\n□ Am I avoiding double-counting with Phase 2 scores?\n□ Have I documented specific evidence with sources?\n\nAdjustment A: Social Penetration (0-1 points, STRICT CRITERIA)\n\n+1 point: ALL THREE criteria must be met:\n  ✓ Direct user report of non-investor recommendations\n  ✓ Specific examples with names/dates/conversations\n  ✓ Multiple independent sources (minimum 3)\n\n+0 points: Any criteria missing\n\n⚠️ INVALID EXAMPLES:\n- \"AI narrative is prevalent\" (unmeasurable)\n- \"I saw articles about retail investors\" (not direct report)\n- \"Everyone is talking about stocks\" (vague, unverified)\n\n✅ VALID EXAMPLE:\n\"My barber asked about NVDA (Nov 1), dentist mentioned AI stocks (Nov 2),\nUber driver discussed crypto (Nov 3)\"\n\nAdjustment B: Media/Search Trends (0-1 points, REQUIRES MEASUREMENT)\n\n+1 point: BOTH criteria must be met:\n  ✓ Google Trends showing 5x+ YoY increase (measured)\n  ✓ Mainstream coverage confirmed (Time covers, TV specials with dates)\n\n+0 points: Search trends <5x OR no mainstream coverage\n\n⚠️ CRITICAL: \"Elevated narrative\" without data = +0 points\n\nHOW TO VERIFY:\n1. Search \"[topic] Google Trends 2025\" and document numbers\n2. Search \"[topic] Time magazine cover\" for specific dates\n3. Search \"[topic] CNBC special\" for episode confirmation\n\n✅ VALID EXAMPLE:\n\"Google Trends: 'AI stocks' at 780 (baseline 150 = 5.2x).\nTime cover 'AI Revolution' (Oct 15, 2025).\nCNBC 'AI Investment Special' (3 episodes Oct 2025).\"\n\n⚠️ INVALID EXAMPLE:\n\"AI/technology narrative seems elevated\" (unmeasurable)\n\nAdjustment C: Valuation Disconnect (0-1 points, AVOID DOUBLE-COUNTING)\n\n+1 point: ALL criteria must be met:\n  ✓ P/E >25 (if NOT already counted in Phase 2 quantitative)\n  ✓ Fundamentals explicitly ignored in mainstream discourse\n  ✓ \"This time is different\" documented in major media\n\n+0 points: P/E <25 OR fundamentals support valuations\n\n⚠️ SELF-CHECK QUESTIONS (if ANY is YES, score = 0):\n- Is P/E already in Phase 2 quantitative scoring?\n- Do companies have real earnings supporting valuations?\n- Is the narrative backed by fundamental improvements?\n\n✅ VALID EXAMPLE for +1:\n\"S&P P/E = 35x (vs historical 18x).\nCNBC article: 'Earnings don't matter in AI era' (Oct 2025).\nBloomberg: 'Traditional metrics obsolete' (Nov 2025).\"\n\n⚠️ INVALID EXAMPLE:\n\"P/E 30.8 but companies have real earnings and AI has fundamental backing\"\n(fundamentals support = +0 points)\n\nPhase 3 Total: Maximum +3 points"
      },
      {
        "title": "Phase 4: Final Judgment (REVISED v2.1)",
        "body": "Final Score = Phase 2 Total (0-12 points) + Phase 3 Adjustment (0 to +3 points)\nRange: 0 to 15 points\n\nJudgment Criteria (with Risk Budget):\n- 0-4 points: Normal (Risk Budget: 100%)\n- 5-7 points: Caution (Risk Budget: 70-80%)\n- 8-9 points: Elevated Risk (Risk Budget: 50-70%) ⚠️ NEW in v2.1\n- 10-12 points: Euphoria (Risk Budget: 40-50%)\n- 13-15 points: Critical (Risk Budget: 20-30%)\n\nKey Change in v2.1:\n\nAdded \"Elevated Risk\" phase (8-9 points) for more nuanced positioning\n9 points is no longer extreme defensive zone (was 40% risk budget)\nNow allows 50-70% risk budget at 8-9 point level\nMore gradual transition from Caution to Euphoria phases"
      },
      {
        "title": "US Market",
        "body": "Put/Call: https://www.cboe.com/tradable_products/vix/\nVIX: Yahoo Finance (^VIX) or https://www.cboe.com/\nMargin Debt: https://www.finra.org/investors/learn-to-invest/advanced-investing/margin-statistics\nBreadth: https://www.barchart.com/stocks/indices/sp/sp500?viewName=advanced\nIPO: https://www.renaissancecapital.com/IPO-Center/Stats"
      },
      {
        "title": "Japanese Market",
        "body": "Nikkei Futures P/C: https://www.barchart.com/futures/quotes/NO*0/options\nJNIVE: https://www.investing.com/indices/nikkei-volatility-historical-data\nMargin Debt: JSF (Japan Securities Finance) Monthly Report\nBreadth: https://en.macromicro.me/series/31841/japan-topix-index-200ma-breadth\nIPO: https://www.pwc.co.uk/services/audit/insights/global-ipo-watch.html"
      },
      {
        "title": "Implementation Checklist",
        "body": "Verify the following when using:\n\n□ Have you collected all Phase 1 data?\n□ Did you apply each indicator's threshold mechanically?\n□ Did you keep qualitative evaluation within +5 point limit?\n□ Are you NOT assigning points based on news article impressions?\n□ Does your final score align with other quantitative frameworks?"
      },
      {
        "title": "1. Data > Impressions",
        "body": "Ignore \"many news reports\" or \"experts are cautious\" without quantitative data."
      },
      {
        "title": "2. Strict Order: Quantitative → Qualitative",
        "body": "Always evaluate in this order: Phase 1 (Data Collection) → Phase 2 (Quantitative) → Phase 3 (Qualitative Adjustment)."
      },
      {
        "title": "3. Upper Limit on Subjective Indicators",
        "body": "Qualitative adjustment has a total limit of +5 points. It cannot override quantitative evaluation."
      },
      {
        "title": "4. \"Taxi Driver\" is Symbolic",
        "body": "Do not readily acknowledge mass penetration without direct recommendations from non-investors."
      },
      {
        "title": "Failure 1: Evaluating Based on News Articles",
        "body": "❌ \"Many reports on Takaichi Trade\" → Media saturation 2 points\n✅ Verify Google Trends numbers → Evaluate with measured values"
      },
      {
        "title": "Failure 2: Overreaction to Expert Comments",
        "body": "❌ \"Warning of overheating\" → Euphoria zone\n✅ Judge with measured values of Put/Call, VIX, margin debt"
      },
      {
        "title": "Failure 3: Emotional Reaction to Price Rise",
        "body": "❌ 4.5% rise in 1 day → Price acceleration 2 points\n✅ Verify position in 10-year distribution → Objective evaluation"
      },
      {
        "title": "Failure 4: Judgment Based on Valuation Alone",
        "body": "❌ P/E 17 → Valuation disconnect 2 points\n✅ P/E + narrative dependence + other quantitative indicators for comprehensive judgment"
      },
      {
        "title": "Normal (0-4 points)",
        "body": "Risk Budget: 100%\n\nContinue normal investment strategy\nSet ATR 2.0× trailing stop\nApply stair-step profit-taking rule (+20% take 25%)\n\nShort-Selling: Not Allowed\n\nComposite conditions not met (0/7 items)"
      },
      {
        "title": "Caution (5-7 points)",
        "body": "Risk Budget: 70-80%\n\nBegin partial profit-taking (20-30% reduction)\nTighten ATR to 1.8×\nReduce new position sizing by 50%\n\nShort-Selling: Not Recommended\n\nWait for clearer reversal signals"
      },
      {
        "title": "Elevated Risk (8-9 points) ⚠️ NEW in v2.1",
        "body": "Risk Budget: 50-70%\n\nIncrease profit-taking (30-50% reduction)\nTighten ATR to 1.6×\nNew positions: highly selective, quality only\nBegin building cash reserves for future opportunities\n\nShort-Selling: Consider Cautiously\n\nOnly after confirming at least 2/7 composite conditions\nSmall exploratory positions (10-15% of normal size)\nStrict stop-loss (ATR 2.0×)\n\nRationale for NEW phase:\nThis zone represents heightened caution without extreme defensiveness.\nMarket shows warning signs but not imminent collapse.\nMaintain exposure to quality positions while building flexibility."
      },
      {
        "title": "Euphoria (10-12 points)",
        "body": "Risk Budget: 40-50%\n\nAccelerate stair-step profit-taking (50-60% reduction)\nTighten ATR to 1.5×\nNo new long positions except on major pullbacks\n\nShort-Selling: Active Consideration\n\nAfter confirming at least 3/7 composite conditions\nSmall positions (20-25% of normal size)\nDefined risk only (options, tight stops)"
      },
      {
        "title": "Critical (13-15 points)",
        "body": "Risk Budget: 20-30%\n\nMajor profit-taking or full hedge implementation\nATR 1.2× or fixed stop-loss\nCash preservation mode - prepare for major dislocation\n\nShort-Selling: Recommended\n\nAfter confirming at least 5/7 composite conditions\nScale in with small positions, pyramid on confirmation\nTight stop-loss (ATR 1.5× or higher)\nConsider put options for defined risk"
      },
      {
        "title": "Composite Conditions for Short-Selling (7 Items)",
        "body": "Only consider shorts after confirming at least 3 of the following:\n\n1. Weekly chart shows lower highs\n2. Volume peaks out\n3. Leverage indicators drop sharply (margin debt decline)\n4. Media/search trends peak out\n5. Weak stocks start to break down first\n6. VIX surges (spike above 20)\n7. Fed/policy shift signals"
      },
      {
        "title": "Evaluation Report Structure (v2.1)",
        "body": "# [Market Name] Bubble Evaluation Report (Revised v2.1)\n\n## Overall Assessment\n- Final Score: X/15 points (v2.1: max reduced from 16)\n- Phase: [Normal/Caution/Elevated Risk/Euphoria/Critical]\n- Risk Level: [Low/Medium/Medium-High/High/Extremely High]\n- Evaluation Date: YYYY-MM-DD\n\n## Quantitative Evaluation (Phase 2)\n\n| Indicator | Measured Value | Score | Rationale |\n|-----------|----------------|-------|-----------|\n| Put/Call | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| VIX + Highs | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| Margin YoY | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| IPO Heat | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| Breadth | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| Price Accel | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n\n**Phase 2 Total: X/12 points**\n\n## Qualitative Adjustment (Phase 3) - STRICT CRITERIA\n\n**⚠️ Confirmation Bias Check:**\n- [ ] All qualitative points have measurable evidence\n- [ ] No double-counting with Phase 2\n- [ ] Independent observer would agree\n\n### A. Social Penetration (0-1 points)\n- Evidence: [REQUIRED: Direct user reports with dates/names]\n- Score: [+0 or +1]\n- Justification: [Must meet ALL three criteria]\n\n### B. Media/Search Trends (0-1 points)\n- Google Trends Data: [REQUIRED: Measured numbers, YoY multiplier]\n- Mainstream Coverage: [REQUIRED: Specific Time covers, TV specials with dates]\n- Score: [+0 or +1]\n- Justification: [Must have 5x+ search AND mainstream confirmation]\n\n### C. Valuation Disconnect (0-1 points)\n- P/E Ratio: [Current value]\n- Fundamental Backing: [Yes/No - if Yes, score = 0]\n- Narrative Analysis: [REQUIRED: Specific media quotes ignoring fundamentals]\n- Score: [+0 or +1]\n- Justification: [Must show fundamentals actively ignored]\n\n**Phase 3 Total: +X/3 points (max reduced from +5 in v2.0)**\n\n## Recommended Actions\n\n**Risk Budget: X%** (Phase: [Normal/Caution/Elevated Risk/Euphoria/Critical])\n- [Specific action 1]\n- [Specific action 2]\n- [Specific action 3]\n\n**Short-Selling: [Not Allowed/Consider Cautiously/Active/Recommended]**\n- Composite conditions: X/7 met\n- Minimum required: [0/2/3/5] for current phase\n\n## Key Changes in v2.1\n- Stricter qualitative criteria (max +3, down from +5)\n- Added \"Elevated Risk\" phase for 8-9 points\n- Confirmation bias prevention checklist\n- All qualitative points require measurable evidence"
      },
      {
        "title": "references/implementation_guide.md (English) - RECOMMENDED FOR FIRST USE",
        "body": "Step-by-step evaluation process with mandatory data collection\nNG examples vs OK examples\nSelf-check quality criteria (4 levels)\nRed flags during review\nBest practices for objective evaluation"
      },
      {
        "title": "references/bubble_framework.md (Japanese)",
        "body": "Detailed theoretical framework\nExplanation of Minsky/Kindleberger model\nBehavioral psychology elements"
      },
      {
        "title": "references/historical_cases.md (Japanese)",
        "body": "Analysis of past bubble cases\nDotcom, Crypto, Pandemic bubbles\nCommon pattern extraction"
      },
      {
        "title": "references/quick_reference_en.md (English)",
        "body": "Daily checklist\nEmergency 3-question assessment\nQuick scoring guide\nKey data sources"
      },
      {
        "title": "When to Load References",
        "body": "First use or need detailed guidance: Load implementation_guide.md\nNeed theoretical background: Load bubble_framework.md\nNeed historical context: Load historical_cases.md\nDaily operations: Load quick_reference.md (Japanese) or quick_reference_en.md (English)"
      },
      {
        "title": "Summary: Essence of v2.1 Revision",
        "body": "v2.0 Problem (Identified Nov 2025):\n\nQualitative adjustment too loose (+5 max)\n\"AI narrative elevated\" → +1 point (no data)\n\"P/E 30.8\" → +1 point (double-counting with quantitative)\nResult: 11/16 points - overly bearish without evidence\n\nv2.1 Solution:\n\nQualitative adjustment stricter (+3 max)\n\"AI narrative elevated\" → 0 points (unmeasured)\n\"P/E 30.8 but AI has fundamental backing\" → 0 points (fundamentals support)\nResult: 9/15 points - balanced, data-driven assessment\n\nKey Improvements:\n\nConfirmation Bias Prevention: Explicit checklist before adding qualitative points\nMeasurable Evidence Required: No points without concrete data (Google Trends, media coverage)\nDouble-Counting Prevention: Valuation must not duplicate Phase 2 quantitative\nGranular Risk Phases: Added \"Elevated Risk\" (8-9 points) for nuanced positioning\nBalanced Risk Budgets: 9 points = 50-70% (not 40% extreme defensive)\n\nCore Principle:\n\n\"In God we trust; all others must bring data.\" - W. Edwards Deming\n\n2025 Lesson:\nEven data-driven frameworks can be undermined by subjective qualitative adjustments.\nv2.1 requires MEASURABLE evidence for ALL qualitative points.\nIndependent observers must be able to verify each adjustment.\n\nVersion History:\n\nv2.0 (Oct 27, 2025): Mandatory quantitative data collection\nv2.1 (Nov 3, 2025): Stricter qualitative criteria, confirmation bias prevention, granular risk phases\n\nReason for v2.1 Revision:\nPrevent over-scoring through unmeasured \"narrative\" assessments and double-counting.\nEnsure all bubble risk evaluations are independently verifiable and free from confirmation bias."
      }
    ],
    "body": "US Market Bubble Detection Skill (Revised v2.1)\nKey Revisions in v2.1\n\nCritical Changes from v2.0:\n\n✅ Mandatory Quantitative Data Collection - Use measured values, not impressions or speculation\n✅ Clear Threshold Settings - Specific numerical criteria for each indicator\n✅ Two-Phase Evaluation Process - Quantitative evaluation → Qualitative adjustment (strict order)\n✅ Stricter Qualitative Criteria - Max +3 points (reduced from +5), requires measurable evidence\n✅ Confirmation Bias Prevention - Explicit checklist to avoid over-scoring\n✅ Granular Risk Phases - Added \"Elevated Risk\" phase (8-9 points) for nuanced risk management\nWhen to Use This Skill\n\nUse this skill when:\n\nEnglish:\n\nUser asks \"Is the market in a bubble?\" or \"Are we in a bubble?\"\nUser seeks advice on profit-taking, new entry timing, or short-selling decisions\nUser reports social phenomena (non-investors entering, media frenzy, IPO flood)\nUser mentions narratives like \"this time is different\" or \"revolutionary technology\" becoming mainstream\nUser consults about risk management for existing positions\n\nJapanese:\n\nユーザーが「今の相場はバブルか?」と尋ねる\n投資の利確・新規参入・空売りのタイミング判断を求める\n社会現象(非投資家の参入、メディア過熱、IPO氾濫)を観察し懸念を表明\n「今回は違う」「革命的技術」などの物語が主流化している状況を報告\n保有ポジションのリスク管理方法を相談\nEvaluation Process (Strict Order)\nPhase 1: Mandatory Quantitative Data Collection\n\nCRITICAL: Always collect the following data before starting evaluation\n\n1.1 Market Structure Data (Highest Priority)\n□ Put/Call Ratio (CBOE Equity P/C)\n  - Source: CBOE DataShop or web_search \"CBOE put call ratio\"\n  - Collect: 5-day moving average\n\n□ VIX (Fear Index)\n  - Source: Yahoo Finance ^VIX or web_search \"VIX current\"\n  - Collect: Current value + percentile over past 3 months\n\n□ Volatility Indicators\n  - 21-day realized volatility\n  - Historical position of VIX (determine if in bottom 10th percentile)\n\n1.2 Leverage & Positioning Data\n□ FINRA Margin Debt Balance\n  - Source: web_search \"FINRA margin debt latest\"\n  - Collect: Latest month + Year-over-Year % change\n\n□ Breadth (Market Participation)\n  - % of S&P 500 stocks above 50-day MA\n  - Source: web_search \"S&P 500 breadth 50 day moving average\"\n\n1.3 IPO & New Issuance Data\n□ IPO Count & First-Day Performance\n  - Source: Renaissance Capital IPO or web_search \"IPO market 2025\"\n  - Collect: Quarterly count + median first-day return\n\n\n⚠️ CRITICAL: Do NOT proceed with evaluation without Phase 1 data collection\n\nPhase 2: Quantitative Evaluation (Quantitative Scoring)\n\nScore mechanically based on collected data using the following criteria:\n\nIndicator 1: Put/Call Ratio (Market Sentiment)\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: P/C < 0.70 (excessive optimism, call-heavy)\n- 1 point: P/C 0.70-0.85 (slightly optimistic)\n- 0 points: P/C > 0.85 (healthy caution)\n\nRationale: P/C < 0.7 is historically characteristic of bubble periods\n\nIndicator 2: Volatility Suppression + New Highs\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: VIX < 12 AND major index within 5% of 52-week high\n- 1 point: VIX 12-15 AND near highs\n- 0 points: VIX > 15 OR more than 10% from highs\n\nRationale: Extreme low volatility + highs indicates excessive complacency\n\nIndicator 3: Leverage (Margin Debt Balance)\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: YoY +20% or more AND all-time high\n- 1 point: YoY +10-20%\n- 0 points: YoY +10% or less OR negative\n\nRationale: Rapid leverage increase is a bubble precursor\n\nIndicator 4: IPO Market Overheating\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: Quarterly IPO count > 2x 5-year average AND median first-day return +20%+\n- 1 point: Quarterly IPO count > 1.5x 5-year average\n- 0 points: Normal levels\n\nRationale: Poor-quality IPO flood is characteristic of late-stage bubbles\n\nIndicator 5: Breadth Anomaly (Narrow Leadership)\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: New high AND < 45% of stocks above 50DMA (narrow leadership)\n- 1 point: 45-60% above 50DMA (somewhat narrow)\n- 0 points: > 60% above 50DMA (healthy breadth)\n\nRationale: Rally driven by few stocks is fragile\n\nIndicator 6: Price Acceleration\nScoring Criteria:\n- 2 points: Past 3-month return exceeds 95th percentile of past 10 years\n- 1 point: Past 3-month return in 85-95th percentile of past 10 years\n- 0 points: Below 85th percentile\n\nRationale: Rapid price acceleration is unsustainable\n\nPhase 3: Qualitative Adjustment (REVISED v2.1)\n\nLimit: +3 points maximum (REDUCED from +5 in v2.0)\n\n⚠️ CONFIRMATION BIAS PREVENTION CHECKLIST:\n\nBefore adding ANY qualitative points:\n□ Do I have concrete, measurable data? (not impressions)\n□ Would an independent observer reach the same conclusion?\n□ Am I avoiding double-counting with Phase 2 scores?\n□ Have I documented specific evidence with sources?\n\nAdjustment A: Social Penetration (0-1 points, STRICT CRITERIA)\n+1 point: ALL THREE criteria must be met:\n  ✓ Direct user report of non-investor recommendations\n  ✓ Specific examples with names/dates/conversations\n  ✓ Multiple independent sources (minimum 3)\n\n+0 points: Any criteria missing\n\n⚠️ INVALID EXAMPLES:\n- \"AI narrative is prevalent\" (unmeasurable)\n- \"I saw articles about retail investors\" (not direct report)\n- \"Everyone is talking about stocks\" (vague, unverified)\n\n✅ VALID EXAMPLE:\n\"My barber asked about NVDA (Nov 1), dentist mentioned AI stocks (Nov 2),\nUber driver discussed crypto (Nov 3)\"\n\nAdjustment B: Media/Search Trends (0-1 points, REQUIRES MEASUREMENT)\n+1 point: BOTH criteria must be met:\n  ✓ Google Trends showing 5x+ YoY increase (measured)\n  ✓ Mainstream coverage confirmed (Time covers, TV specials with dates)\n\n+0 points: Search trends <5x OR no mainstream coverage\n\n⚠️ CRITICAL: \"Elevated narrative\" without data = +0 points\n\nHOW TO VERIFY:\n1. Search \"[topic] Google Trends 2025\" and document numbers\n2. Search \"[topic] Time magazine cover\" for specific dates\n3. Search \"[topic] CNBC special\" for episode confirmation\n\n✅ VALID EXAMPLE:\n\"Google Trends: 'AI stocks' at 780 (baseline 150 = 5.2x).\nTime cover 'AI Revolution' (Oct 15, 2025).\nCNBC 'AI Investment Special' (3 episodes Oct 2025).\"\n\n⚠️ INVALID EXAMPLE:\n\"AI/technology narrative seems elevated\" (unmeasurable)\n\nAdjustment C: Valuation Disconnect (0-1 points, AVOID DOUBLE-COUNTING)\n+1 point: ALL criteria must be met:\n  ✓ P/E >25 (if NOT already counted in Phase 2 quantitative)\n  ✓ Fundamentals explicitly ignored in mainstream discourse\n  ✓ \"This time is different\" documented in major media\n\n+0 points: P/E <25 OR fundamentals support valuations\n\n⚠️ SELF-CHECK QUESTIONS (if ANY is YES, score = 0):\n- Is P/E already in Phase 2 quantitative scoring?\n- Do companies have real earnings supporting valuations?\n- Is the narrative backed by fundamental improvements?\n\n✅ VALID EXAMPLE for +1:\n\"S&P P/E = 35x (vs historical 18x).\nCNBC article: 'Earnings don't matter in AI era' (Oct 2025).\nBloomberg: 'Traditional metrics obsolete' (Nov 2025).\"\n\n⚠️ INVALID EXAMPLE:\n\"P/E 30.8 but companies have real earnings and AI has fundamental backing\"\n(fundamentals support = +0 points)\n\n\nPhase 3 Total: Maximum +3 points\n\nPhase 4: Final Judgment (REVISED v2.1)\nFinal Score = Phase 2 Total (0-12 points) + Phase 3 Adjustment (0 to +3 points)\nRange: 0 to 15 points\n\nJudgment Criteria (with Risk Budget):\n- 0-4 points: Normal (Risk Budget: 100%)\n- 5-7 points: Caution (Risk Budget: 70-80%)\n- 8-9 points: Elevated Risk (Risk Budget: 50-70%) ⚠️ NEW in v2.1\n- 10-12 points: Euphoria (Risk Budget: 40-50%)\n- 13-15 points: Critical (Risk Budget: 20-30%)\n\n\nKey Change in v2.1:\n\nAdded \"Elevated Risk\" phase (8-9 points) for more nuanced positioning\n9 points is no longer extreme defensive zone (was 40% risk budget)\nNow allows 50-70% risk budget at 8-9 point level\nMore gradual transition from Caution to Euphoria phases\nData Sources (Required)\nUS Market\nPut/Call: https://www.cboe.com/tradable_products/vix/\nVIX: Yahoo Finance (^VIX) or https://www.cboe.com/\nMargin Debt: https://www.finra.org/investors/learn-to-invest/advanced-investing/margin-statistics\nBreadth: https://www.barchart.com/stocks/indices/sp/sp500?viewName=advanced\nIPO: https://www.renaissancecapital.com/IPO-Center/Stats\nJapanese Market\nNikkei Futures P/C: https://www.barchart.com/futures/quotes/NO*0/options\nJNIVE: https://www.investing.com/indices/nikkei-volatility-historical-data\nMargin Debt: JSF (Japan Securities Finance) Monthly Report\nBreadth: https://en.macromicro.me/series/31841/japan-topix-index-200ma-breadth\nIPO: https://www.pwc.co.uk/services/audit/insights/global-ipo-watch.html\nImplementation Checklist\n\nVerify the following when using:\n\n□ Have you collected all Phase 1 data?\n□ Did you apply each indicator's threshold mechanically?\n□ Did you keep qualitative evaluation within +5 point limit?\n□ Are you NOT assigning points based on news article impressions?\n□ Does your final score align with other quantitative frameworks?\n\nImportant Principles (Revised)\n1. Data > Impressions\n\nIgnore \"many news reports\" or \"experts are cautious\" without quantitative data.\n\n2. Strict Order: Quantitative → Qualitative\n\nAlways evaluate in this order: Phase 1 (Data Collection) → Phase 2 (Quantitative) → Phase 3 (Qualitative Adjustment).\n\n3. Upper Limit on Subjective Indicators\n\nQualitative adjustment has a total limit of +5 points. It cannot override quantitative evaluation.\n\n4. \"Taxi Driver\" is Symbolic\n\nDo not readily acknowledge mass penetration without direct recommendations from non-investors.\n\nCommon Failures and Solutions (Revised)\nFailure 1: Evaluating Based on News Articles\n\n❌ \"Many reports on Takaichi Trade\" → Media saturation 2 points ✅ Verify Google Trends numbers → Evaluate with measured values\n\nFailure 2: Overreaction to Expert Comments\n\n❌ \"Warning of overheating\" → Euphoria zone ✅ Judge with measured values of Put/Call, VIX, margin debt\n\nFailure 3: Emotional Reaction to Price Rise\n\n❌ 4.5% rise in 1 day → Price acceleration 2 points ✅ Verify position in 10-year distribution → Objective evaluation\n\nFailure 4: Judgment Based on Valuation Alone\n\n❌ P/E 17 → Valuation disconnect 2 points ✅ P/E + narrative dependence + other quantitative indicators for comprehensive judgment\n\nRecommended Actions by Bubble Stage (REVISED v2.1)\nNormal (0-4 points)\n\nRisk Budget: 100%\n\nContinue normal investment strategy\nSet ATR 2.0× trailing stop\nApply stair-step profit-taking rule (+20% take 25%)\n\nShort-Selling: Not Allowed\n\nComposite conditions not met (0/7 items)\nCaution (5-7 points)\n\nRisk Budget: 70-80%\n\nBegin partial profit-taking (20-30% reduction)\nTighten ATR to 1.8×\nReduce new position sizing by 50%\n\nShort-Selling: Not Recommended\n\nWait for clearer reversal signals\nElevated Risk (8-9 points) ⚠️ NEW in v2.1\n\nRisk Budget: 50-70%\n\nIncrease profit-taking (30-50% reduction)\nTighten ATR to 1.6×\nNew positions: highly selective, quality only\nBegin building cash reserves for future opportunities\n\nShort-Selling: Consider Cautiously\n\nOnly after confirming at least 2/7 composite conditions\nSmall exploratory positions (10-15% of normal size)\nStrict stop-loss (ATR 2.0×)\n\nRationale for NEW phase: This zone represents heightened caution without extreme defensiveness. Market shows warning signs but not imminent collapse. Maintain exposure to quality positions while building flexibility.\n\nEuphoria (10-12 points)\n\nRisk Budget: 40-50%\n\nAccelerate stair-step profit-taking (50-60% reduction)\nTighten ATR to 1.5×\nNo new long positions except on major pullbacks\n\nShort-Selling: Active Consideration\n\nAfter confirming at least 3/7 composite conditions\nSmall positions (20-25% of normal size)\nDefined risk only (options, tight stops)\nCritical (13-15 points)\n\nRisk Budget: 20-30%\n\nMajor profit-taking or full hedge implementation\nATR 1.2× or fixed stop-loss\nCash preservation mode - prepare for major dislocation\n\nShort-Selling: Recommended\n\nAfter confirming at least 5/7 composite conditions\nScale in with small positions, pyramid on confirmation\nTight stop-loss (ATR 1.5× or higher)\nConsider put options for defined risk\nComposite Conditions for Short-Selling (7 Items)\n\nOnly consider shorts after confirming at least 3 of the following:\n\n1. Weekly chart shows lower highs\n2. Volume peaks out\n3. Leverage indicators drop sharply (margin debt decline)\n4. Media/search trends peak out\n5. Weak stocks start to break down first\n6. VIX surges (spike above 20)\n7. Fed/policy shift signals\n\nOutput Format\nEvaluation Report Structure (v2.1)\n# [Market Name] Bubble Evaluation Report (Revised v2.1)\n\n## Overall Assessment\n- Final Score: X/15 points (v2.1: max reduced from 16)\n- Phase: [Normal/Caution/Elevated Risk/Euphoria/Critical]\n- Risk Level: [Low/Medium/Medium-High/High/Extremely High]\n- Evaluation Date: YYYY-MM-DD\n\n## Quantitative Evaluation (Phase 2)\n\n| Indicator | Measured Value | Score | Rationale |\n|-----------|----------------|-------|-----------|\n| Put/Call | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| VIX + Highs | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| Margin YoY | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| IPO Heat | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| Breadth | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n| Price Accel | [value] | [0-2] | [reason] |\n\n**Phase 2 Total: X/12 points**\n\n## Qualitative Adjustment (Phase 3) - STRICT CRITERIA\n\n**⚠️ Confirmation Bias Check:**\n- [ ] All qualitative points have measurable evidence\n- [ ] No double-counting with Phase 2\n- [ ] Independent observer would agree\n\n### A. Social Penetration (0-1 points)\n- Evidence: [REQUIRED: Direct user reports with dates/names]\n- Score: [+0 or +1]\n- Justification: [Must meet ALL three criteria]\n\n### B. Media/Search Trends (0-1 points)\n- Google Trends Data: [REQUIRED: Measured numbers, YoY multiplier]\n- Mainstream Coverage: [REQUIRED: Specific Time covers, TV specials with dates]\n- Score: [+0 or +1]\n- Justification: [Must have 5x+ search AND mainstream confirmation]\n\n### C. Valuation Disconnect (0-1 points)\n- P/E Ratio: [Current value]\n- Fundamental Backing: [Yes/No - if Yes, score = 0]\n- Narrative Analysis: [REQUIRED: Specific media quotes ignoring fundamentals]\n- Score: [+0 or +1]\n- Justification: [Must show fundamentals actively ignored]\n\n**Phase 3 Total: +X/3 points (max reduced from +5 in v2.0)**\n\n## Recommended Actions\n\n**Risk Budget: X%** (Phase: [Normal/Caution/Elevated Risk/Euphoria/Critical])\n- [Specific action 1]\n- [Specific action 2]\n- [Specific action 3]\n\n**Short-Selling: [Not Allowed/Consider Cautiously/Active/Recommended]**\n- Composite conditions: X/7 met\n- Minimum required: [0/2/3/5] for current phase\n\n## Key Changes in v2.1\n- Stricter qualitative criteria (max +3, down from +5)\n- Added \"Elevated Risk\" phase for 8-9 points\n- Confirmation bias prevention checklist\n- All qualitative points require measurable evidence\n\nReference Documents\nreferences/implementation_guide.md (English) - RECOMMENDED FOR FIRST USE\nStep-by-step evaluation process with mandatory data collection\nNG examples vs OK examples\nSelf-check quality criteria (4 levels)\nRed flags during review\nBest practices for objective evaluation\nreferences/bubble_framework.md (Japanese)\nDetailed theoretical framework\nExplanation of Minsky/Kindleberger model\nBehavioral psychology elements\nreferences/historical_cases.md (Japanese)\nAnalysis of past bubble cases\nDotcom, Crypto, Pandemic bubbles\nCommon pattern extraction\nreferences/quick_reference.md (Japanese)\nreferences/quick_reference_en.md (English)\nDaily checklist\nEmergency 3-question assessment\nQuick scoring guide\nKey data sources\nWhen to Load References\nFirst use or need detailed guidance: Load implementation_guide.md\nNeed theoretical background: Load bubble_framework.md\nNeed historical context: Load historical_cases.md\nDaily operations: Load quick_reference.md (Japanese) or quick_reference_en.md (English)\nSummary: Essence of v2.1 Revision\n\nv2.0 Problem (Identified Nov 2025):\n\nQualitative adjustment too loose (+5 max)\n\"AI narrative elevated\" → +1 point (no data)\n\"P/E 30.8\" → +1 point (double-counting with quantitative)\nResult: 11/16 points - overly bearish without evidence\n\nv2.1 Solution:\n\nQualitative adjustment stricter (+3 max)\n\"AI narrative elevated\" → 0 points (unmeasured)\n\"P/E 30.8 but AI has fundamental backing\" → 0 points (fundamentals support)\nResult: 9/15 points - balanced, data-driven assessment\n\nKey Improvements:\n\nConfirmation Bias Prevention: Explicit checklist before adding qualitative points\nMeasurable Evidence Required: No points without concrete data (Google Trends, media coverage)\nDouble-Counting Prevention: Valuation must not duplicate Phase 2 quantitative\nGranular Risk Phases: Added \"Elevated Risk\" (8-9 points) for nuanced positioning\nBalanced Risk Budgets: 9 points = 50-70% (not 40% extreme defensive)\n\nCore Principle:\n\n\"In God we trust; all others must bring data.\" - W. Edwards Deming\n\n2025 Lesson: Even data-driven frameworks can be undermined by subjective qualitative adjustments. v2.1 requires MEASURABLE evidence for ALL qualitative points. Independent observers must be able to verify each adjustment.\n\nVersion History:\n\nv2.0 (Oct 27, 2025): Mandatory quantitative data collection\nv2.1 (Nov 3, 2025): Stricter qualitative criteria, confirmation bias prevention, granular risk phases\n\nReason for v2.1 Revision: Prevent over-scoring through unmeasured \"narrative\" assessments and double-counting. Ensure all bubble risk evaluations are independently verifiable and free from confirmation bias."
  },
  "trust": {
    "sourceLabel": "tencent",
    "provenanceUrl": "https://clawhub.ai/Veeramanikandanr48/us-market-bubble-detector",
    "publisherUrl": "https://clawhub.ai/Veeramanikandanr48/us-market-bubble-detector",
    "owner": "Veeramanikandanr48",
    "version": "0.1.0",
    "license": null,
    "verificationStatus": "Indexed source record"
  },
  "links": {
    "detailUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/us-market-bubble-detector",
    "downloadUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/downloads/us-market-bubble-detector",
    "agentUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/us-market-bubble-detector/agent",
    "manifestUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/us-market-bubble-detector/agent.json",
    "briefUrl": "https://openagent3.xyz/skills/us-market-bubble-detector/agent.md"
  }
}