Why Price Volatility is NOT Risk
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 07. 2024
- The first 1000 people to use the link will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership: skl.sh/theplainbagel10201
CORRECTION: at 2:00, the Y-axis of the graphs should be the stock's return, not it's price, sorry for the error!
If you'd like to support the channel, you can do so at Patreon.com/ThePlainBagel :)
Volatility has come to represent risk in a plethora of investment theories and models, but there are some fundamental flaws to this approach. We go over them in today's video.
Intro Music: www.bensound.com/royalty-free...
This video is sponsored by Skillshare
DISCLAIMER:
This channel is for education purposes only and is not affiliated with any financial institution, although Richard does work as an employee for an investment manager. Richard Coffin is not registered to provide investment advice and as such does not provide recommendations on The Plain Bagel - those looking for investment advice should seek out a registered professional. Richard is not responsible for investment actions taken by viewers.
I am from Taiwan, and not a native speaker. Although it is hard for me to catch up your speed, I would always play it at 0.75 speed or repeat the video as the content is very insightful. Thanks Richard
@just a random person :) Don’t go into politics please
@just a random person :) China doesn't exist mate, its all a simulation.
@@JLove808 agreed. Chinese stocks got crushed this year due to the insanity of the ccp 8:20 in this video. My tsm has done quite well. I think Taiwan has a very smart president.🇹🇼
Richard does talk pretty fast for non native speakers. I made a joke on playing his five minute history lessons at 2x 😛
@@brendansmith7842I usually play every youtuber's videos at 2x speed
Richard who runs an investing channel: I wont claim that I'm better than the market
Other investing channels: *Wait. That's illegal.*
@Vivek Ghosh Agreed, that's why I've been following his content for more than 1 year now
I think the pandemic has thought a lot of people the important of multiple streams of income unfortunately have a job doesn't mean security
Most people don't know the best time to invest is during crisis/recession. Investment a $1000 can turn you into a millionaire sometime later
@Nathaniel Simpson This is 100% true, self made billionaires like Warren buffet and bill gates never made it depending on paychecks, neither were they salaries earners, I think investment should be on every wise individual mindset, and currently all of it is online in a month or two you will be ecstatic about the decision you have made.
Best advice always pick profitable stock to invest in and get a pro broker to start with
I really commend you. For someone that has formal education in finance, it's not easy to break free from some ideas that flawed but taught in school.
Tbf many models, which are taught in school, are just simplifications. Refined, more realistic models require more mathematical background and appear far more abstract.
I have a degree in finance with a strong focus on security valuation and I think this video is conflating valuation of future cash flows with risk. I argue that current and past pricing captures both. Regardless, someone with formal education shouldn't be making investment decisions purely on pricing. For this we need market research and security analysis which can get overwhelming when you're discussing portfolios that hold 100+ investments. Hence, the reason why we use pricing to talk about pricing as volatility.
volatility = risk is suitable for trading.
And I agree that when Investing, I ignore volatility, instead, I seek margin of safety to reduce risk
There are lots of newer investors that pay far too much attention to daily price movements. If the management is good and their future plans seem solid then why does 1 day of the price going down change anything. If there hasn't been a bad company announcement or sudden terrible financial report then don't sweat it.
@Guybrush Threepweed Yeah, most are just looking at super high risk companies. Some get lucky but then lots of the big winners plow it all back in again and have lost everything within a week.
Thanks that very good information for me as a beginner
It depends on what you are trying to do in the market.
Generally agree, but there are certain circumstances where it does matter (in my personal view). One example is where a long term price target is suddenly met in a matter of days because of some short-term spike without any fundamental change to the underlaying. Chances are the spike will reverse and the asset will resume it's long-run trajectory. But if the price target has been met why tie up capital for another 12 months just to capture the same return - it makes sense to sell, reduce exposure time and redeploy capital elsewhere. There is an opportunity cost involved.
@@eeekkk34235 Exactly.
Another point is, if you expect a rise, but the stock keeps slowly sliding without reasonable explanation.
It's much preferable to sell at loss, put money something, that actually makes profit, or even just hold it, until stock starts to recover. Then hit it.
Of course it greatly depends on individual stocks and how they behave.
Great video Richard, probably the smartest one I have seen on this topic. On point two I thought you were going to suggest implied volatility as a forward looking estimate of volatility.
I think there are a few reasons standard deviation is used as a measure of risk in markets, the main one is simply that it works very well in mathematical formulas, the second reason is that any forward looking estimate of the price of a security is tied to uncertainty, it may do better and it may do worse, so when you add standard deviation in alongside expected return, you are essentially predicting a bell curve of returns.
One of my favourite definitions of risk comes from Elroy Dimson at LBS “Risk means that more things can happen than will happen.”
Love the video and keep up the good work.
Thanks Patrick! Appreciate the insightful feedback!
oh...i love that definition
Thank you for giving more insight Patrick, your videos are also great btw.
Yes it is a great video and point of view. Although I could argue that many models and simulations use the expected return and volatility to forecast how “far” off you will be from the desired return. Therefor it would be considered as risk.
Also just like Patrick I thought about implied volatility to measure the future volatility. You could also use Monte Carlo simulations and other models that take into account probability of an event happening to account for the randomness of the risk. In the end one could argue that volatility measures the uncertainty of an outcome but risk isn’t always bad, you just have to adjust your expected return to the risk. Great video though!
Measuring risk as volatility is one of the main reasons why I'm not a huge fan of modern portfolio theory. Over-diversification is definitely a thing. Great video!
Wow! My mind is blown. I studied so much the modern portfolio theory at business school and they never mentioned that.
I took volatility=risk at face value without even thinking.
Thanks!
The video is heavily predicated on a rejection of modern portfolio theory. If modern portfolio theory is true, and stocks take random walks, then volatility is risk.
The video is convoluted. You're better off doing more research because I think our boy is confused on this one.
I'm a Ph.D. in finance, specialized in risk, there is a whole lot of different risk measures out there. You can start looking at this with Coherent Measures of Risk - Artzner et al- 1999. But keep in mind there was a huge development in recent years. This literature uses mainly monetary risk measures, that in principle at least, have nothing to do with volatility. You may have heard of a few examples such as Value-at-Risk, Expected Shortfall, Maximum Loss, Entropic Risk measures, etc. The most basic literature applies those risk measures on the distribution of the stocks' profit/loss, which you need to estimate. But, as I see that you are a fundamentalist at heart, you can find some of those risk measures and papers on this literature that will take the fundamentals into account.
Thanks for chiming in! Could you share any good books on investment risks?
Your videos are splendid! Thank you for giving me a new perspective to contemplate!
I think the shorter the time frame, the better volatility estimates risk. Which means for day trading or for options trading it is a risk. For long term investing (without a fixed date you must sell), I don’t think it’s a good measurement of risk. Imo volatility plays part in risk whenever there is a date the investment must be sold and increasingly so when you near that date, the longer time left the worse the measurement is.
Always amazing video! In those time were stock market fluctuate a lot... this information really help me !
Great video! As always
Dude i am 16 and because of you i think my financial future is secured thanks bro you made a great difference in my life
Nothing is solidified in this world, but no matter how you feel. Keep moving forward ✊🏼
@@jacob.brandw thx bro
It's awesome that you started investing so early. Keep compounding it will add up nicely over the next couple of years
TATAKAE TATAKAE - Eren Yeager, Attack on Titan
Remember Buffets two rules! Very smart I started at 19 had my first home at 26. You can do it!
Thanks. This puts things in excellent perspective.
I like what you are doing here, subscribed!
Hi Richard, Your Content are very informative... thank you for sharing...always curious abt your contents
Love ur videos of one the best stock market channels
Loved this video! great job, man.
this channel is soo underrated, we need more views !
One of the best channels on Investing no doubt
Best video for Value Investors. Sometimes, price becomes a nightmare for investors and traders
Thank you for this information 👍
Thank you for sharing, wide view explanation.
Great video, thanks for sharing.
You are so good at explaining things
Couple of things. Converting part of a company into cash would reduce - not increase - its risk, because returns from cash are less risky than the returns from even the safest business. And the risk of an asset does not vary with how much you invest in it - it's your portfolio risk that varies.
Excellent job..Thank you.
Even those who teach volatility as risk say that downside semi-varience is a much better measure. However that doesn't work in the kind of formulas that could be easily run on computers in the 90s. Semi-varience is still too slow to calculate for HST strategies.
A+ Tutorial...Excellent Job, and thank you..
Loved the video. Can you please make a video on BSM model
78k views? Criminally underrated channel.
Richard is the best financial educator on CZcams. You will become a smarter and more well rounded person when it comes to finance and investing from his channel. Zero bias. Only facts.
Thank you Richard for all of your hard work! 🇨🇦
Great channel 💯
Volatility can be a sign that the fundamentals that provide the underlying value is not justified. Overpricing can also be a sign of that even with very low volatility and zero growth or very solid linear growth.
Great video!
My favorite learning channel 😍
Even an Argentinian like me gets hope in the economy listening to the plain bagel
great video! from korea~
i ve been confusing volatility as a risk
Moderno portfolio theory does not tell you to use past realized volatility, but to forecast future standard deviation and covariance matrix
Awesome video. 🌿 ty.
Great video. I never got why people think a volatile stock would necessarily be more risk. Has no impact on the intrinsic value itself
In my view volatility can create a lot of opportunities.
If your checking account balance goes up or down 30% any given day at no fault of your own, do you not think that's a risk to you? Volatility affects long term investments as well because unless you plan to never sell your investments at some point the long term becomes the short term.
Crazy arguments love it
One missing component here how volatility in a stock's price makes rare, quantized events (like investors selling) or more importantly, a capital raise - very sensitive to stock price, and so does indirectly influence risk. A company with volatility can get unfavourable stock/bond issuance terms, which over time can make the company improve slower, or be less nimble against competitors, and thus eventually die.
☝Best take on against volatility for long tern investors who's investing for capital protection with cashflow incentive is covering their positions with hedging options.
Risk happens slowly, then all at once
This is my favourite channel
What a great video. So insightful👏🥯
"Volatility is risk" annoys me to no end.
Gambling literature is filled with these calculations. Most casino games are high variance, low-risk for the casino. Of course, high variance games are fun for the players.
Sorry too bring a low brow subject into this, but the moral of the story is that variance has nothing to do with long-term expectation. High variance can equate to high or low (+/-) expectation.
neon glow one play has high variance, not playing a million plays...
"Variance has nothing to do with long-term expectation. High variance can equate to high or low (+/-) expectation"
Sure, when the volatility is symmetric and not seasonal - But that's not the case with prices on the market.
Additionally, shortfall risk isn't the only kind of risk to worry about, there are concerns regarding default, systemic failure, marginal risk etc. Volatility isn't the only risk - But volatility is, for all practical purposes a solid measure of risk.
Gambling is a different ball game regarding risk too, it's not an apt comparison. Casinos know the underlying probability distribution, investors don't and are expected to infer it from historic returns.
Casinos smooth out the games volatilities against each other and it reduces the overall volatility at operational level. Your example doesn’t work.
i was just learning this
Happy Friday everyone! The first 1000 people to use the link will get a free trial of Skillshare Premium Membership: skl.sh/theplainbagel10201
Great video as usual. I podcast about personal finance topics, and plain bagel helps a lot.
Volatility is one of those things that actually gives the long term investor a higher chance of good returns without increasing the risk at the same time.
This idea that the farmer can make the same amount when his land is selling for 600 vs when it’s selling for 2000 relies on the assumption that it didn’t drop to 600 because it is expected to produce less now than it was before. Isn't this assuming market inefficiency in a serious way??
Thanks for the vid! I've been an advocate for this way of thinking. However, I do also think that if you have a definite investment horizon...let's say retire at 65, I do think volatility approaches closer and closer to risk as your investment horizon gets shorter. that is, volatility starts looking more and more like risk as your investment end date gets closer.... If I have a goal... let's say, buy a boat at 40 and decide to invest to reach that goal, if mkt falls 30% the yr before, then not big deal, I can just wait couple of years for the mkt to recover and buy the boat later...but on the other hand if I do really want/have to retire at 65 and mkt falls 30% when I'm 64, then volatility is, in my opinion, an equivalent for risk as I will be forced to sell at a loss if I have to retire...unless I decide to not retire and work for a few more years of course...in fact, I think a lot of people went through this in 2008....my point is that at some time everyone, regardless if it is short term or long term, will have to deal at some point with risk = volatility.
I think what long term investors do not realize is that at some point in time they will also be "short term investors"...sort of...of course is not black or white, but I hope I can make my point across.
thanks again and keep the good work. I watch all of your videos!
Even with long-term investors, volatility = risk still holds since Var(p_(t + n)) = p_0 + Var(x_0) + Var(x_1) + Var(x_2) + ... + Var(x_n)
@@zacker150 that just says that volatility at time n is equal to the sum of volatilities, and f course that holds true in hindsight ..that is not what I am saying at all. What I am saying is that you can diversify volatility as your time horizon is longer. This is empirically proved, you can just look at returns triangles of hundreds of stocks and you will find how the longer your horizon, the less chances to lose money you have. You can also plot rolling returns for a stock among years and you will see how A LOT of the "RISK" (volatility) is pretty much gone. In fact if you invested in the S&P500 for a period of 20 years, there is no a single point in time (investing for a period of 20 yrs) where you started investing and actually loose money....(I can send you the python code if you want to check it for yourself)...now, try to see what happen during 1 yr or just a couple of them...let's say, you invest for 2 years in 2007.....
So, what I'm saying is that as you can diversify volatility away with time horizon (time diversification). Therefore, what you should be concern if you are going to invest for a very long time is not volatility
if you want to look at risk=volatility go head, that is your investment strategy
have a good one:)
@@juanvicencio2390 There are two points I would like to raise:
1. Just because you'll never lose money doesn't mean that there's no risk. The risk of an asset is the uncertainty in how close you'll get to the "expected" return. For an example, an asset with a 50% chance of making 1% and a 50% chance of making a 3% is riskier than an asset with a 100% chance of making 2%. Likewise, the possibility that my S&P 500 portfolio might only make a 5% annualized return instead of 7% over the next 20 years is risk.
2. The benefits of diversification are independent of time horizon, including the infinitesimal short term. We can see this empirically by comparing the volatility of the S&P 500 to its component stocks. Fundamentally, what diversification does is reduce Var(x_i) for your portfolio value.
@@zacker150
Hi again victor victor :),
I partially agree with you first part of point and I understand where you are trying to go with it. Well, technically, if you never lose money by definition there is no risk UNLESS you have some sort of expected return, or you have any type of benchmark, which we all have, so yes, there is risk in expecting 7% and getting 5% despite you made money because in our investment process we all are trying to maximize our returns (ant that is why IMO margin of safety is such an important concept in investing)...but it is important to understand where this expected return comes from (the variability of past prices of the asset using a factor, beta, whereas is through a linear regression of benchmark and asset, or normalized syst risk of asset with benchmark, which yields to the same result)...so if you use volatility as a measure o risk to predict an expected return, of course, and by definition of the theory itself, you will have risk as volatility. This is sort of a mmmhhh...self-fulfilling prophecy, and that is why it woks so beautifully in hindsight but most of the time fail to consistently overperform the mkt because as many other methods (that we all use because there is no better option) try to predict a return based on past price movements.
"an asset with a 50% chance of making 1% and a 50% chance of making a 3% is riskier than an asset with a 100% chance of making 2%"...This means asset A is more volatile than assets B. If you run a simulation of asset A through many periods you will find that the return in the long term will be extremally close to 2%...(I know that you just give an example, but I hope you understand the point I am trying to make) so Again, this is a situation of viewing risk as volatility. Which connects me to the second point
2. Diversification effect in terms of eliminating unsystematic risk by holding many assets is in fact independent to the time horizon. This is not what I am talking about. What I am talking about is 'time diversification' (I don't know if there is a formal term for it). This is when you hold a SINGLE asset for a longer period. Then you can in fact see how the volatility is massively reduced. You can go on check yourself returns triangles on single stocks or see the rolling returns vs volatility for the same assets along different time horizons ( I can also send you codes if you work with python)
that being said, if volatility is effectively reduced over long times horizons, then the point I am trying to make across is that volatility for longer time horizons is not a good measure of risk. HOWEVER, we don't exist only in the long term, so my point is that as your time to retrieve your investment comes closer, volatility becomes a better measure or risk. This is why for traders volatility = risk, but this is shouldn't be the case for many people that hold assets in the long term (although I am not saying that they should completely neglect volatility)
well, I have been writing forever, I appreciate the time you took to read if you did. This subject is so fun to discuss! not sure if I will be able to dedicate more time to it plus it is likely hat we never come to an agreement ahhah
have a good one!
Anyone who thinks pricing doesn't capture risk shouldn't be investing. These are the same clowns that get on financial news channel and always fail to predict recessions.
Yo Richard, where the sick intros at?!
P.S. a video about SPACs would be great!
😂😂😂😂
@Marc L Patrick Boyle already has one if you're interested
8:56 - 9:11
Probably the best Investing tip out there
We just have to acknowledge that there is many type of risks and many definitions.
I love price fluctuations I watch them daily it's fun.
#1 risk is a human thing...it can't be boiled down to a simple std deviation, sharpe or even sortino ratio. it's multi faceted and its purely a perception unique to an individual. uncertainty -> anxiety -> fear -> increased probability of impaired decisionmaking. imo risk is actually the question: can you save yourself from yourself? BUT...
#2 the practical argument (not just the mathematical one) for risk as beta is not wholly terrible. mainly due to #1... as an investment deviates from the market, even positively, it thus attracts more buyers, eventually leading to inflated PE, and higher probability of a correction
#3 has anyone dug into dr sortino's newer DTR-a (desired target rate alpha)?
Risk is very well mathematically defined, and it has little to do with volatility. However, it is indeed true that there is no consensus on the best way to measure risk.
What about *Risk* in the context of long term ETFs and index investing? Wouldn't Risk mean something else to these investors?
Maybe Risk in that sense is just needing to withdraw the money while the market is down, since is not very likely that S&P 500 indexes will suffer permanent capital impairment and therefore you would be realizing losses due to downward volatility.
Only risk is trying to retire and live off 4% of your portfolio in the middle of a recession basically. It’s the only empirically proven method of wealth creation. Doing anything else IS the risk hey.
Exactly.
I feel bad watching your videos for free. Keep going
Plain Bagel coming in the clutch once again. Surprised that its not a risk/reward.
I'm going to need some convincing on this one, Mr Bagel.
BadMotherFuCKer eh?
@BadMotherFuCKer how rich is plain bagel? i believe him though but remember this is value investing
Yes , me too , I think this video is a click bait
@@arunv9197 he is saying its not risk for long term investing which is true, but not everyone is long
@BadMotherFuCKer yes, just like every long term investor though lol. its just one of those things, hes a household favorite.
to me hes kind of old school. i love his philosophy but i do agree he makes way more money. right now, thematic investing, and investing in the future, other types of investing is actually more popular.
ppl like him because he is safe. and they will quote him all the time. it does get annoying but at least he has good advice. theres some people with horrible advice and faek courses.
Nice video. I always believed that if you for example hold something in cash where you definitely generate losses due to inflation is more risky even though the volatility is very low.
There are different forms of risk. Volatility is just one of them. I think this video is a disservice to non-professionals.
It's better to ask why prices are changing. It can be for any reason. Look what happend with Hertz.
Buy stocks and hold. 80% of shareholders can't do just that.
The GOAT
Volatility is relative, it's a vague concept defined by intuition, and attempting to plug it into purely logically based formulas it won't make sense. When someone determines volatility, they do so subconsciously defining a specific context for the situation they find themselves in. The considerations they made in that instance won't translate to any instance outside that poorly defined context, that's the downfall of intuition and experience based decision making. It's that it relies on subconscious reasoning and abilities that don't translate easily and aren't effectively reflected into hard data.
Sounds like quantum entanglement
Stockholder and Company
CZcams: Why Price Volatility is NOT Risk?
Me to myself: Huh...just recently started to learn about the stock market and investing, it sounds intimidating. Pretty sure not gonna get any of this.
Me after the the video: I understood everything!?!? WHAT!?!?
Also check out warren buffett's talk on this matter, it's also on CZcams.
Hope you achieve financial freedom in life. YOU GOT THIS!
While technically correct (selling while down would lock in a loss) how is the point expressed at 8:10 not a logical fallacy, given the fact that unrealized pnl is still the pnl of the position?
Whether or not you should still be long at any given point is (ignoring tax consequences and fees) irrelevant to your entry point.
I ❤ ur videos.
Great Content! Always learning!
Looking forward for a comprehensive video regarding “Special-purpose acquisition company (SPAC) or blank-check company.
Thanks in advance 👊🏻
Lol I had this topic as part of my master thesis.
Last time I was this early plain bagel has less than 60k subs
Finally, someone to say that!
As a TA trader with stoploss, I agree XD
But in this time even junk bonds can have negatives rates.
No risk premium to nibble on if the central banks are involved.
So Volatility does not guarantee/rewards risk.
In my final year of an economics and finance degree in England. Im always saying this to my lecturers but they don’t seem to even want to consider anything other than what’s easiest for them to teach.
Hey I'm also doing my last year now, but u do have to understand that volatility absolutely is risk because each price change represents a change in valuation, based on either intrinsic values or Behavioural reasons, which ultimately determine the demand for a given asset
The like button is not big enough, thanks Richard!
😂
You realized you found a good channel when you see you made the video I wanted to do 😹
Volatility is more effective when we are running with hedge positions
Hmm, just a layman myself but in terms of higher risk for a lower priced stock (due to increased vol), but i guess thats where VaR (value at risk) comes in isnt it. So you adjust ur risk measure by the amount you put in so a lower priced stock (with a higher vol) wouldnt be seen as riskier. Next, i think the human tendency to sell when stocks are down isnt so much that we are worried about the volatility (my opinion) but rather that we feel that the decrease in price is due to a market consensus that the company's has had a fundamental decline, which i guess make it rational, rather than the volatility itself. (though there is market herding but that's another topic altogether)
ah the good old buy high sell low strat
Not trying to be rude. But this video is purely anecdotal...you are bringing up no actual evidence. Volatility is used in combination with annualized returns as well in portfolio theory. So saying the stock that is trending down is less risky makes no sense...it would be extremely far off the efficient portfolio frontier because the return is negative and there is volatility.
i agree. this is probably one of his worst videos.
Firstly, man just saying that volatility alone primarily is not a good measure of risk, especially in the long run. But you are correct about the efficient frontier part idk why he didn't bring that up.
The argument isn't that risk can't be assumed, but that risk = volatility is a risk in itself. Looking at event risk, or sentiment; is more comprehensive, because it better tracts the flow of cash, which is the primary thing that influences price (and therefore volatility). Risk of ruin is greatest for 4, 5 , 6, even 7 standard deviation moves. Those can't be predicted with volatility.
@@Gh0stsn5tuff What? Anything 5 standard deviations out is effectively zero.
@@tayloroxelgren264 My friend, the market does not have a normal distribution. This is why a risk of ruin will always exist independent of volatility. You should research more into the efficient frontier theory to see the common criticisms.
Aaaaah yes the graham approach
Price volatility just gives more opportunities to buy in. Thanks for sharing!
…I hope you’re right on this…
About time standard concepts in economics and finance get debunked. Let's take the value of a stock - it's meant to reflect the future discounted cash from a company ...to infinity. Ok so people can see into the future until eternity now ? Similarly, volatility has its place; people should use volatility to indicate deviations in share prices, which is exactly what volatility measures. Extrapolating to measure something else, requires many assumptions, some of which are false, as you have shown in the video. I think volatility is a measure of short term risk particularly if you're about to sell but the main drivers of risks are the fundamentals of the business - prospects, management, competitive landscape....etc. These are what Warren Buffett was referring to and rightfully so. Really good video, I'm very impressed! I would subscribe twice but CZcams says that's not allowed :P
In defense of volatility = risk, I think the best way of thinking about it is that volatility reflects how sensitive the value of a stock is to news, or in other words, how much the future discounted cash from a company is affected by news.
I think "the probability of losing money" is a bad definition here because you also have to think of the amount of money you will lose.
Consider an asset that costs $5 and at any point in the future can be redeemed for $4. It is 100% likely to lose 20% of its value. Now lets contrast it with this investment, it costs $5 and we flip 2 coins, if all of them come up heads you get $5.50, if any of them are tails you lose it all. So in this case you have a 75% chance of losing $5. That is a much lower probability of losing money, but it's pretty clear that in any normal sense of the word, the guaranteed $1 loss, is less risky than the very likely $5 loss.
I mean otherwise this is fine and I get where you are going with it, but like that's a big and important difference.
Long story short: It just determines the quality/types of investors. High volatility is a sign of unstable investors, not an unstable company.
that's a great way of putting it
Not to mention stock buybacks change the perceived value of a stock
volatilty should be the standard deviation of the price, as a percentage of the average price, not the current price... so you wouldn't have any of those weird effects
The error is that you are using past realized volatility as risk, why not using standard deviation of future PnL distribution instead?
You're right....more Apple! And Microsoft.
For the first shortcoming, don't we take standard deviation of RETURNS and not PRICE? For instance:
If the price increased 10% everyday, the standard deviation of price would be high, but not the standard deviation of returns.
Yes that's correct! An oversight on my part and I've added a correction to the video description, thanks for highlighting.
is the hole still in the wall?
I see you want to appeal to the TSLA boys huehue
Thanks - great video. I have long thought that risk and volatility get used interchangeably without a lot of thought.
if youtube comments help boost a channel in the algorithm, i would probably comment on every video
I'd love to have subscribers like you :) Need to release better videos