Is there any evidence to suggest that these large companies use all of the data they own to improve their own portfolios?
He touches on many topics throughout the book and has several talks on Youtube including ones at Microsoft research. Touches on Siren Servers which collate big data and used for not so ethical business practices.
Bottom line to answer your last question is yes, yes they are. The invasive spying tools implemented by these companies give them the opportunity to tailor a very targeted marketing campaign that captures and retains people in their business ecosystem.
Read the book a while ago so can't cite any particular evidence. Jaron pretty much states who ever has the biggest computer with the most data wins. He saw the birth of big insurance companies implement computing into their business practice which was a game changer.
Interested if anyone has an real world scenarios to chime in
Some find alpha with speed. (See Flash Boys by Michael Lewis for a look at the insane lengths companies go to gain fractions of a second advantages). Some find alpha with better algorithms.
You’re positing that because the big tech companies have so much data they should be better at predicting markets. The problem is that having the data is just one part of the problem.
Look at satellite imagery. Every hedge fund worth its salt has probably thought of and has used satellite imagery. Virtually all of them have the same access to it. They purchase it through third party providers. There are undoubtedly unused satellite imagery techniques out there that would allow you to gain alpha in the market.
So why don’t the hedge funds use these unused strategies? Because having the data is only one part of the problem. Analyzing, preparing, cleaning, and finding a useful way to use the data is the other part. Hypothesizing new ways to look at the data that would reveal some insights is a big part.
Data is helpful but it isn’t the end all for making money in the markets.