Talk:Alpha (finance)/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Erroneous
Recommend the deletion of this Stub, as it is erroneous in all respects (other than the categories in which it is filed). Please see Investopedia.com for "alpha," "weighted alpha," and "excess returns."
I regret not having the time nor intellect to properly contribute to your excellent site.
—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.205.250.106 (talk) 01:31, 18 April 2005
'Beta' section
I think that the section on beta should be given its own article, as there isn't currently one in existence. Is there a way I can mark a section saying it ought to be moved, or do I just go straight ahead? --CarrotMan 11:44, 26 October 2006 (UTC)
Does this statement make sense? "Note the "correlated" modifier: an investment can be twice as volatile as the total market, but if its correlation with the market is only 0.5, its beta to the market will be 1." When you say the investment can be twice as volatile as the total market aren't you already saying that the correlation is 2.0?
Decent
I think this basic description is pretty decent for a non-expert wanting the concept explained in simple terms. (The Investopedia.com definition requires you to actually have some financial background). Epstein's Mother 03:28, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
Alpha's relation to risk-free return
This part of the explanation is wrong, or at least very idiosyncratic. I'm going to change this section, and link to Campbell Harvey's webpage which has a much better definition. --RobertC (talk) 17:23, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
Not Understandable
Wiki articles should be written, at least as far as the introduction is concerned, with the intention of informing the non specialist; that requires care in defining terms, some repetition, and not using jargon. You get no thanks from me for breaking all three of these rules. 08:05, 23 November 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.168.97.211 (talk)
Definition
The section with the formula has a lot of variables which are left undefined. These should be defined, or at least referenced, so anyone with basic math skills can understand this. Otherwise, it is only there for people who already understand finance math. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.192.96.90 (talk) 15:56, 20 October 2018 (UTC)