Randomized trial reveals the geometric alignment of commodity and safe haven currencies during risk-off periods, indicating a diagnostic for investors.
Visibility graphs map time series to networks whose combinatorial structure encodes fractality, recovering the Hurst exponent of self-affine processes. We ask what the visibility construction carries beyond this fractal content. We lift the visibility graph to a 1-varifold, a measure on position and direction space from geometric measure theory, and equip it with a multiscale positive definite kernel. The lift embeds visibility graphs of unequal size in a common Hilbert space and yields a channel-resolved measure of cross-series geometric alignment. On a 25.8-year daily panel of thirteen commodity and currency layers, we define a relative alignment contrast that compares commodity currencies and safe haven currencies in their geometric alignment with the commodity complex. During global risk-off episodes the contrast is large and positive: commodity currencies import commodity shock geometry far beyond a time-shift independence benchmark, while the Japanese yen remains near geometric independence and the franc is confounded by a managed regime. The contrast is significant under three stress definitions with autocorrelation robust inference, holds as a continuous dose response, survives the removal of any single crisis, withstands moment, fractal, and topological controls, is direction-consistent across sixteen specifications, and collapses under a time-shift placebo. Detrended fluctuation analysis explains only two percent of it, so the reconfiguration is geometric information beyond fractality at this horizon, and a scaling exponent of the kernel mass separates a fractal-free component from a fractal-driven one. For investors, financial institutions, and policymakers, the contrast is a real-time structural diagnostic of flight to safety: it marks when commodity currencies stop diversifying the commodity complex while genuine safe havens still do, signaling through a channel that second-moment risk measures are built to miss.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Balcı et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: