3 ms·
Well 1.05x0.85x1.30x1.10x1.00=1.27 Wow, so they are ~27% off the mean! The part that isn't clear is how this compared to typical performance variation - then
by frozenport 9y ago
Well 1.05x0.85x1.30x1.10x1.00=1.27
Wow, so they are ~27% off the mean!
The part that isn't clear is how this compared to typical performance variation - then we can run our p-tests. But I suspect its pretty good, given the news worthiness of the article.
- rockostrich 9y agoWouldn't 1.27^0.2=~1.05 be a better indicator?
- CreepGin 9y agoYes. 1.05 over the mean. Also for the actual return: 2013 +22% 2014 -2% 2015 +33% 2016 +22% 2017 +10% (til June) (1.22 * 0.98 * 1.33 * 1.22 * 1.1) ^ 0.2 = 1.16 Or for the 4 whole years: (1.22 * 0.98 * 1.33 * 1.22) ^ 0.25 = 1.18