My colleague in the next cubicle took one of the CPA exams last Friday. A couple of minutes ago, he asked me- “Is Standard Deviation written on % basis?” I said “Yes, of course. It’s a measure of total risk, btw”. He- “I know, but how is it written in statistics?” Me- “statistics? What do you mean by statistics. I thought we were talking about stats” He- " Yes, but how can it be written on a % basis". Me- “!#@#TEF@#!!!*^$” (totally dumb struck) And this guy is supposedly very smart. Haha
So what “kind” of people are you done with?
To give you the heads up it’s not always written on a % basis… You may be think of the CFA’s “coefficient of variation”
Turkish, I’m done with Mr. Smarty Pants. ahahaha, Of course. You can convert it to a decimal format. And no, I was not thinking about C.V.
Well what about S.D. of a fair Die? ~1.18 has nothing to do with percentage points…
ahahah Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Well what about S.D. of a fair Die? ~1.18 has > nothing to do with percentage points… Looks like we should be done with Ruhi22. “And this guy is supposedly very smart. Haha”
ahaha, it depends what you’re talking abt. That’s what I told him,. What if you consider the stock returns? Isn’t it on a % basis then? We were discussing stock returns.
Sorry, I’m a math geek in Real Estate so I have to flex my nerd muscles every once in a while…
be careful of being “done with these kind of people”. your colleague sounds like management material.
Definitely has the brains for that stuff.
SD can be measured in dollar terms or percentage. He isn’t a dumb ass for asking that. for instance in VAR analysis, many times they would use a dollar value which makes the interpretation a bit easy. and VAR uses the SD to derive that value.
Frank, Good point regarding VAR. Yes, we do measure SD in various formats. It totally depends upon the context. Here, we were talking about stock returns and all he could ask me was “like how is it in statistics?”.
sd takes the same measurement as the data you are measuring the sd on. if you are measuring stock return as %, the sd is in % if you are doing it for absolute dollar return, then the sd will be in dollars if you standardized the stock return (%) with the market return (%), then the sd is unit-less. Your colleague might not have espoused his question lucidly, but you were equally inept in your response.
I won’t mention it again- I was only talking about the stock return. propanol, there is no need to be such a smart a$$. Looks like people are getting ruder day by day. I talk to people in online forums in the same manner I would speak to them in real life. It pays to be a little kinder while responding, unless you are one of those people who take absolute pleasure in being a moron.
Turkish Can you send me an email, I need to talk to you. It looks like we are both Turkish and working in the same field. firstname.lastname@example.org Thanks
propanol Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sd takes the same measurement as the data you are > measuring the sd on. > > if you are measuring stock return as %, the sd is > in % > if you are doing it for absolute dollar return, > then the sd will be in dollars > if you standardized the stock return (%) with the > market return (%), then the sd is unit-less. > > Your colleague might not have espoused his > question lucidly, but you were equally inept in > your response. Owned.
First, you recount an incident with your colleague, and quite explicitly suggest that he is, in your not-so-humble opinion, not the sharpest knife despite his purported “cleverness” and having took the CPA exam, the relevance of which I cannot comprehend. That, to me, is rudeness. Second, from your high-browed reply to your colleague, it is quite obvious that you either do not really understand a simple concept like sd, or have not measure stock returns in anything else other than %, and quite amusingly, seem to assume that it can only be measure this way. That, to me, is quintessentially a smart-ass ethics. Finally, when it is pointed to you that your colleague might not be quite as dense as you imagine him to be, and you not as learned, you got defensive and started alleging that the forumers who replied are less than civilised. That, to me, is moronic, and a pathetic one to add. Isn’t it funny how you have, to me at least, exemplify all the “qualities” that you despise?
“Turkish Can you send me an email, I need to talk to you. It looks like we are both Turkish and working in the same field. email@example.com Thanks” I’m not Turkish, I was named after a mythical plane crash and promote bare knuckle boxing matches.
Dear CH3CH2CH2OH, Thank you for setting me straight.
this thread sucks