Search results

I think it will be useful, especially since in Tracking Error we think about return as a random variable. Anyway - it's clear form the context what do you mean, but as you wrote, I think higher level of precision would be great :)

Also, I am not sure if this belongs here, but I will post it anyway - I find it confusing that in the study notes in this chapter "market return" and "portfolio return" really mean "EXPECTED market return". As I understand, a priori a return of a portfolio is a random variable. (Sorry...

Chapter 5, page 17: In the example calculations the units are inconsistent. I.e, Treynor = either 0.08 or 8% Sharpe = 0.2% Jensen's alpha is ok. I think that the example should stick to percent notation, so the Treynor is equal to 8%. Otherwise, the Sharpe=0.002 and alpha=0.025.