2,756
edits
Talk:Skewness in financial markets: Difference between revisions
Talk:Skewness in financial markets (view source)
Revision as of 09:18, 15 January 2023
, 15 January 2023no edit summary
(Created page with "== Assessment of Skewness in financial markets == User:Glnb I never spent time studying the skewness of returns in financial markets but think the results of the study are...") |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Assessment of Skewness in financial markets == | == Assessment of Skewness in financial markets == | ||
[[User:Glnb]] I never spent time studying the skewness of returns in financial markets but think the results of the study are very intuitive. In the end there are in many industries "winners" who will outperform and dominante their industry. One important argument to mention here is: The 4% of companies who outperform have with all likelihood a very high market capitalization weight. (Certainly more than 4%, probably more in the direction of 50+%. Would be interesting to study that) --[[User:PirateCaptain|PirateCaptain]] ([[User talk:PirateCaptain|talk]]) 09:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC) | [[User:Glnb]] I never spent time studying the skewness of returns in financial markets but think the results of the study are very intuitive. In the end there are in many industries "winners" who will outperform and dominante their industry. One important argument to mention here is: The 4% of companies who outperform have with all likelihood a very high market capitalization weight. (Certainly more than 4%, probably more in the direction of 50+%. Would be interesting to study that) --[[User:PirateCaptain|PirateCaptain]] ([[User talk:PirateCaptain|talk]]) 09:08, 15 January 2023 (UTC) | ||
== Consequences of Skewness in Angel/VC Investing== | |||
Bzgl a) Ziel ist natürlich bei den wenigen high perfomern dabei zu sein. Aber macht man das, indem man möglichst breit streut, wodurch man die Wahrscheinlichkeit erhöht einen positiven outlier einzufangen und, all else equal, wahrscheinlich näher am return mean als am return median liegt (mean ist um ein Vielfaches höher aka skewness)? Man kann die Wahrscheinlichkeit einen positiven outlier einzufangen aber auch erhöhen, indem man mehr Zeit in die Analyse steckt und mehr Deals anschaut. Wenn man unendlich viel Zeit hätte, würde man beides machen: Diversifikation und viele Unternehmen und deren Märkte/Technologie ganz tief durchleuchten. In der Praxis ist es natürlich ein Kompromiss. Das ist ein Argument für große fund sizes fällt mir gerade auf... -- [[User:Glnb]] | |||
[[User:Glnb]] I'd say it really depends on the industry. My guess without beeing knowledgeable is that diversification is more important the earlier the investment stage because the variance in management team skill, operation capability etc. is higher. A good strategy could be identifying one or serval industries with enormous potential that you study and understand well and then to back multiple teams in the space. --[[User:PirateCaptain|PirateCaptain]] ([[User talk:PirateCaptain|talk]]) 09:18, 15 January 2023 (UTC) | |||