The market is a controlled dynamic system. - page 249
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
Oh, dear... They have filled many people's heads with stories about "market inefficiency" but have not explained that if there is "inefficiency" there must also be "efficiency", but they have forgotten to explain what efficiency is...
It's a sad thing... :(
Oh, dear... They have filled many people's heads with stories about "market inefficiency" but have not explained that if there is "inefficiency" there must also be "efficiency", but have forgotten to explain what efficiency is...
It's a sad thing... :(
Explain it to the clogged ones))
Efficiency is a characteristic of a system defined by the ratio of the usefulness of the results of the intended use of the system to the costs and losses due to the development, creation and operation of that system.
Management theory. Terminology. M: Nauka. 1988.
Efficiency is a characteristic of a system defined by the ratio of the utility of the results of the intended use of the system to the costs and losses due to the development, creation and operation of that system.
Utility=profit?
Utility = profit?
In our case, YES
In our case - YES.
OK. What are the"costs and losses due to the design, build and operation of this system" in relation to your example:
You opened an account at the beginning of the year. You deposited $1,000. You traded quite successfully for a year. During the year you made five withdrawals of $50 each. At the end of the year your account balance is $1,100. Question: What is the efficiency of your trading?
ok. What is the"costs and losses due to the design, creation and operation of this system" as applied to your example?
At the beginning of the year you opened an account. You put in $1,000. You traded quite successfully for a year. During the year you made five withdrawals of $50 each. At the end of the year your account balance is $1,100. Question: What is the efficiency of your trading?
Costs --$1,000 in investment.
Costs --He deposited $1,000.
Well, he still has it)) Costs are what's not there anymore. Oh, come on: efficiency=$350/1,000$=0.35?
Avals:
1) Так они же у него остались))
2) Costs are something that no longer exists. Whatever:
3) эффективность=350$/1000$=0.35?
1) They did remain, but they had to be contributed, i.e. taken out of the budget. If they had not, there would have been no result.
2) And it's not always "Costs are something that's already gone" --- you've probably never experienced accounting.
3) That's the complication... But now you can quickly compare different systems at different deposits and different profits. It's that simple.
Now think about what happens if you don't take the cache into account when calculating efficiency. And when you think about it, you will realize that the cache must be taken into account. Otherwise, it would be nonsense.
1) They did remain, but they had to be deposited, i.e. withdrawn from the budget. If they had not, there would have been no result.
2) And it's not always "Costs are something that doesn't exist anymore" --- you've probably never experienced accounting.
3) That's the difficulty... But now you can quickly compare different systems at different deposits and different profits. It's that simple.
Now think about what happens if you don't take the cache into account when calculating efficiency. And when you think about it, you will realize that the cache must be taken into account. Otherwise it would be nonsense.
So it is 35% per annum)). I have already written to you about them and that it is relative profit/profitability/profitability. Why make up your own terms when there are generally accepted ones and you have already been given the answer. But never mind)) 0.35=35% is enough for you to compare systems?
Now think about what happens if you don't take the cache out into account when calculating efficiency. And when you think about it, you'll realize that the cache must be taken into account. Otherwise it would be nonsense.
The question was not about accounting for the cache withdrawn, but why it is necessary to withdraw it regularly, and not as the cache is needed, for example.