@Sixcarbs
The exact conversion to make it an annualized IRR is:
(1+IRR)^2-1 in this case it actually gives 6.99% or basically 7%.
https://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=(1+0.034377)^2-1
I don’t have Excel on my phone but using Google Sheets I get answer that agrees with calculator. Can you...
Can you show screenshot of what exactly you Goal Seek in Excel?
The calculator and IRR in Excel assume periodic CFs with a generic period with length between periods being 1.
Goal Seek:
RATE:
=RATE(4,3,-98.39,100,0,0.03)
IRR:
=IRR({-98.39,3,3,3,103},0.03)
All give ~3.44% and * 2 = 6.88%.
It reads a bit vague. Do you have the first draft that got rejected for comparison? I think this actually might get accepted, but if it was on a CV or job interview I would say it’s lacking substance (contains too much filler).
I would specify the firm, your role and department in the actual...
I don’t believe it does. It might if you were a postdoc though. I’d email GARP, but I would be surprised if it counted.
That being said, if you are doing a PhD, I don’t see how much value you will get out of FRM. Maybe best to focus on that and your internships. What do you need FRM...
I never heard of it until now. From my five minutes of research, I do not see much value in it if you are actively pursuing CFA designation. IMC seems to be a very basic certification to get an entry level position.
At a certain point I think certifications have diminishing returns. Experience...
Not sure if I follow, you have a function,
y= f(x) = ln(x/(1-x)), with 0<x<1 and you want to find inverse?
The way I was taught was to replace “y” with “x” and then solve for y. Getting rid of LN will involve taking EXP.
I see. Yes, Variance is not a coherent risk measure. It’s easier to show the failure of the other properties rather than get bogged down with monotonicity in my opinion.
Is this a math, risk or some hybrid class? Can you share the exact definition of showing risk measure is monotone you were provided with? For example, is it a strictly greater than or greater than or equal to is OK? Does the definition state anything about RV being perfectly correlated? Are...
OK so your definition is if X > Y everywhere then VAR(X) > VAR(Y)?
Few questions on your proof:
1) Suppose I had made Z = Y - X, then I get same Variance breakdown right?
2) VAR(anything) >= 0 by definition, right?
3) Even if I know VAR(Z) > 0, how do I know/show VAR(X) > VAR(Y)?
Did you mean to write F inverse = ln((alpha)/(1-alpha))? I.e. the logit probability function?
To prove g(x) is strictly increasing, show g’(x) > 0 for all x.
To get CDF you can find the inverse of the function you have, take derivative you get PDF.
VAR: By definition VAR is based on the...
Can you give us the definition of monotonicity you are using? If you can share your current proof, then I can comment on the validity and soundness.
I believe the proof would involve using VAR(X) = E(X^2) - E(X)^2.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.