SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Ask Michael Burke

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Tommaso who wrote (117470)1/5/2009 1:41:44 PM
From: TRINDY  Read Replies (1) of 132070
 
Greetings. This is simply the binomial probability model with parameters p=2/3, n=3 for x=0,1,2,3 successes. By success, we mean a tripling of the price. Thus,

Prob(X=0) = 1/27, as you suggest
Prob(X=1) = 2/9
Prob(X=2) = 4/9
Prob(X=3) = 8/27

The mean is 2 and the standard deviation is sqrt(n*p*(1-p))=.82

Thus, 4 out of 9 times, one would expect to have exactly two of the investments tripling and one going to zero. This illustrates the gains from spreading your risk. It also assumes that the events are independent. If they are correlated, that is an entirely different calculation.

Now let's look at the expected change in wealth assuming that $1000 is placed in each stock. If each goes to zero, you have a -3000 change in wealth. With one success and two failures you have a (+2000 -1000 -1000)or zero change in wealth. With two successes and one failure you have (+2000 + 2000 -1000) or $3000 change in wealth; with three successes a +$6000 change in wealth. The expected change in wealth (Sum Wi*P(Xi)) works out to be exactly $3000, given your parameters and equal investments. Thus you have an expectation of exactly a 100% gain.

I hope this helps, but recognize the key assumption of independence of outcomes, as in a coin toss.

Cheers!
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext