Correlation, allocation in a portfolio. Calculation methods - page 10
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
first the second
the first one follows from it
i.e. on the background of a break-even portfolio there is an opportunity to increase the risk up to 100%
first the second
the first one follows from it
that is, against the background of a break-even portfolio there is an opportunity to increase the risk to 100%.
I don't know, I don't know. I always thought (I was taught) that the quality of a portfolio depends on the quality of its assets. That's why their selection is the most important task. And risk hedging is the second task, from profitable assets, (there is not enough money for everything anyway) to create a portfolio with the lowest risk of total loss.
How did you manage to ramp up the thread to 10 pages without answering at least a bit of my question:)
I think the answer was yes, count by pierson. They even gave a link to where to calculate. And they pointed out that estimation and availability are different things.)
How did you manage to get this thread to 10 pages without answering my question even a little bit:)
just read it carefully.
;)
I don't know I don't know. I always thought(I was taught) that the quality of a portfolio depends on the quality of the assets. That's why their selection is the most important task. And risk hedging is the second task, from profitable assets, (there is not enough money for everything anyway) to make a portfolio with the lowest risk of total loss.
You've been brainwashed.
assets are interconnected, all of them.
what quality we're talking about, i don't know.
there will be no correlation, the market will sell itself and give away profits to traders.it's been bingo for a long time, but it's not all that simple.
nuances...
fogged up their brains.
assets are interconnected, all of them.
what quality we are talking about - dunno.
Quality of an asset is stability of profitability, which can be counted differently) Sharpe, drawdown, ratio of periods of loss to profit, rate of profitability / loss. Here the field is not too regulated.
But the quality of the asset, is its stability and profitability. The correlations have nothing to do with it.
In forex, the notion of an asset is smeared. It is essentially an assembly of an TS and a tool. The tool itself means nothing and brings no profit. And with TS the trader's nerves are just rubbed, and the profitability and stability can be estimated).
The quality of the asset is the stability of profitability, you can think of it differently) Sharpe, drawdown, ratio of periods of profit loss, rate of profit/loss. This is where the field is not too regulated.
But the quality of the asset, is its stability and profitability. The correlations have nothing to do with it.
In forex, the notion of an asset is smeared. It is essentially an assembly of an TS and a tool. The tool itself means nothing and brings no profit. And with TS the trader's nerves are frayed and the profitability and stability can be evaluated).
what are you telling me?
nothing is smeared and everything is transparent.
the sum of assets equals zero, always!
it makes absolutely no difference which way the price moves
one price moves at the expense of the other two
The same example with oil, at a price below zero.
this is normal, due to the sum of the three interrelated instruments being equal to zero!
this is the break-even portfolio in which you can rake in the entire deposit.what are you telling me?
the sum of the assets is zero, always!
It makes absolutely no difference which way the price moves.
One price moves at the expense of the other two.
The same example with oil, at a price below zero.
it's a normal phenomenon!
Cool, not disputing your assertions in any way, but what about the value added? And how will it be to the price of the asset. Let's move to equities. In currencies it is too complicated, the country is not a firm)
The sum of all stocks equals some figure which we take as zero. Further, some shares go up, some shares go down, but the sum will be equal to zero.
And where does the value added from the activity go? Note, it is more than the value of the spent, because we have profitability)))