Research
What the data says
Each of these asks one question and answers it with a measurement rather than an opinion. Every horizon is reported, nothing is selected for looking good afterwards, and the answer so far is the same in every case.
Measured so far
| Configuration | Occurrences | Result |
|---|---|---|
| Full moon (Purnima) | 130 | No measurable effect |
| New moon (Amavasya) | 137 | No measurable effect |
| Mercury turns retrograde | 34 | No measurable effect |
| Saturn changes sign | 8 | Too few to say |
| Jupiter changes sign | 19 | Too few to say |
| Rahu and Ketu change axis | 7 | Too few to say |
| Solar or lunar eclipse | 48 | No measurable effect |
4 of these have enough occurrences to be answerable at all; the rest are reported as unanswerable rather than as negative, because those are different claims.
Why publish results that found nothing
Because the alternative is what the rest of this field does. Test enough configurations and some will look significant by chance alone: out of a hundred thousand tests, a hundred will clear p < 0.001 with nothing behind them. Publishing only those is not analysis, it is selection.
A site that never shows you a failure is not telling you its method works. It is telling you which results it chose to show.
Before you use this
Astro World Finance is research and analytics software. It is not investment advice, and nothing it produces is a recommendation to buy or sell any security. There is no established evidence that planetary positions predict returns.
Trading in securities and derivatives carries risk of loss. Measured past behaviour does not establish future behaviour. Anyone providing investment advice to others in India requires registration with SEBI.