tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post864987487732448582..comments2024-03-25T17:30:02.150+08:00Comments on 積微錄: 投資心理學:股息的迷惑池裡漁http://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-83259958679820692892016-01-19T15:55:12.336+08:002016-01-19T15:55:12.336+08:00哈。好,下一篇再比啲題目你揀下。哈。好,下一篇再比啲題目你揀下。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-44288307251373815452016-01-19T15:32:23.297+08:002016-01-19T15:32:23.297+08:00In the past, I would use the word "irrational...In the past, I would use the word "irrational" to describe this problem. But when I think about it more deeply, I realize that expected return is not the only criterion that one needs to consider. Also important can be variance, maximum gain/loss, etc. So choosing the choice with less expected value might not be stupid at all, it could be in fact be "smart"Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06500970973415056818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-75512032939543752332016-01-19T15:18:17.262+08:002016-01-19T15:18:17.262+08:00對。可見那個諾貝爾獎有些取巧,並不太嚴謹。
與Wanderer兄、魔師兄和Steven兄等高人交流真...對。可見那個諾貝爾獎有些取巧,並不太嚴謹。<br />與Wanderer兄、魔師兄和Steven兄等高人交流真是腦洞大開,賞心樂事也。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-87544459538844067252016-01-19T14:01:00.502+08:002016-01-19T14:01:00.502+08:00Another point is whether the goal is to maximize t...Another point is whether the goal is to maximize the expected return or maximize the risk reward ratio (similar to sharpe ratio). The choices with lower expected value in this example have a bigger sharpe ratio Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06500970973415056818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-10527866566805584682016-01-19T13:52:34.231+08:002016-01-19T13:52:34.231+08:00Yes, I agree. the number of trials should affect t...Yes, I agree. the number of trials should affect the choice between A and B. I suppose when this experiment is done, the implicit assumption is you can only choose one time. So even a mathematician might opt to choose the one with lower expected return, by taking into account the variance involvedAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06500970973415056818noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-25709417616289986722016-01-17T18:46:16.614+08:002016-01-17T18:46:16.614+08:00都有人鍾意一個決定之後就話之佢「直至永遠」架,為之一箭定/輸江山。都有人鍾意一個決定之後就話之佢「直至永遠」架,為之一箭定/輸江山。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-69144781739915309582016-01-17T18:28:56.819+08:002016-01-17T18:28:56.819+08:00投資者其實每秒都在做投資決定,買/賣/不變(唔理個市就係by default 不變),所以基本上投...投資者其實每秒都在做投資決定,買/賣/不變(唔理個市就係by default 不變),所以基本上投資就是在「射無限枝箭」。不敗的魔術師https://www.blogger.com/profile/12738598802399619797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-43626912757598542092016-01-17T13:41:56.129+08:002016-01-17T13:41:56.129+08:00唐勤兄提出了另一個很重要的point。對於不同的資本結構,對現金流的考量是不一樣的。唐勤兄提出了另一個很重要的point。對於不同的資本結構,對現金流的考量是不一樣的。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-56128592429392081352016-01-17T13:37:23.210+08:002016-01-17T13:37:23.210+08:00看似「不理性」的比例嚴重偏高,就是因為參與者都視為一次定生死。看似「不理性」的比例嚴重偏高,就是因為參與者都視為一次定生死。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-42669359982435208092016-01-17T10:46:40.816+08:002016-01-17T10:46:40.816+08:00好文。但賭博又同投資不一樣,有時候現金流(股息)對某些投資者比資本增值更重要。好文。但賭博又同投資不一樣,有時候現金流(股息)對某些投資者比資本增值更重要。Tom Kan 唐勤https://www.blogger.com/profile/04298192793618200609noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-72875454190143237432016-01-17T08:51:52.512+08:002016-01-17T08:51:52.512+08:00是的,其實不應只看expected return,還要看risk,即risk adjusted re...是的,其實不應只看expected return,還要看risk,即risk adjusted return. 如果sampling size太少,便又回到池兄早前有關射箭的問題上不敗的魔術師https://www.blogger.com/profile/12738598802399619797noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-63878061030101959232016-01-17T01:29:50.837+08:002016-01-17T01:29:50.837+08:00厲害。Wanderer君提出了兩個影響人們選擇的重要因素,非常到肉。厲害。Wanderer君提出了兩個影響人們選擇的重要因素,非常到肉。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-75833306043995216922016-01-17T01:29:22.918+08:002016-01-17T01:29:22.918+08:00Yes。原來是池某表達得不夠清楚。Yes。原來是池某表達得不夠清楚。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-17083593658970456862016-01-16T23:50:37.136+08:002016-01-16T23:50:37.136+08:00假如我只能選擇一次,我一定會選擇第一題B而第二題A。第一條選B不盡然是因為厭惡風險,而是因為不值得去...假如我只能選擇一次,我一定會選擇第一題B而第二題A。第一條選B不盡然是因為厭惡風險,而是因為不值得去冒風險,$3000和$4000差不多,既然可以肯定賺到$3000,那就沒必要為了賺多$1000而面對一無所得這風險。但是,如果不是$4000而是$40000的話,那這風險值得去冒。而第二條選擇A也是因為類似的原因,輸多$1000差不了多少,但假如是輸$100000,那我寧願選100%機會輸$3000,即使輸$100000的機會小至5%也是一樣。<br />除非我需要不斷選擇,否則期望值這概念沒多大意義,只有在多次選擇後才會實現期望值這"平均值"。一次定生死,還是要因應實際情況看看划不划得來。Isaac Wonghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04424267363033799954noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-67491309156518858712016-01-16T23:12:21.928+08:002016-01-16T23:12:21.928+08:00如果早知有幾多長幾多短,條數緊係易計…如果早知有幾多長幾多短,條數緊係易計…Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-7579181472905460092016-01-16T17:36:04.904+08:002016-01-16T17:36:04.904+08:00「水魚」不少,搶食的「大鱷」更多,搵食都係幾艱難架。「水魚」不少,搶食的「大鱷」更多,搵食都係幾艱難架。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-74090303032300461742016-01-16T17:25:50.148+08:002016-01-16T17:25:50.148+08:00「既然戰場上有那麼多人甘於“蝕底”,還“蝕底”得那麼舒服,看見股息就像“水魚”看見魚餌一樣湧過去。以...「既然戰場上有那麼多人甘於“蝕底”,還“蝕底”得那麼舒服,看見股息就像“水魚”看見魚餌一樣湧過去。以數理邏輯作理性決策的一方,若不乘機“搵著數”,對得起自己嗎?」<br /><br />雖然理論上是這樣,但市場上以水魚為食的資金眾多,相比起來水魚的資金還算是弱勢的一方,例如高息股在水魚的追捧下不見得會捧出大幅度溢價來(有時會出現此情況,但不多),故有心「搵著數」也相當考技巧。流星https://www.blogger.com/profile/17808326189295457970noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-34226498585073249542016-01-16T17:14:57.931+08:002016-01-16T17:14:57.931+08:00所以跟着感覺走不知不覺間就會做出自相矛盾的事情來。所以跟着感覺走不知不覺間就會做出自相矛盾的事情來。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-64527218036719870122016-01-16T16:48:51.909+08:002016-01-16T16:48:51.909+08:00主要看公司是否能將資金更有效運用,為股東爭取更大的回報,如很久很久以前匯豐「以股代息」,絕對是明智決...主要看公司是否能將資金更有效運用,為股東爭取更大的回報,如很久很久以前匯豐「以股代息」,絕對是明智決定。狗股小子https://www.blogger.com/profile/09157066196421309514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-72354095616504489492016-01-16T15:32:29.426+08:002016-01-16T15:32:29.426+08:00吊詭之處就在這裡,就算大把人知道買巴郡著數啲,現實中佢地都係唔買。吊詭之處就在這裡,就算大把人知道買巴郡著數啲,現實中佢地都係唔買。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-78782418326593979442016-01-16T15:28:48.438+08:002016-01-16T15:28:48.438+08:00森而兄是把無法確定結果等同於無法作概率估算了。
把文章裡的「選擇題一」改一下應該會容易理解一些:
A...森而兄是把無法確定結果等同於無法作概率估算了。<br />把文章裡的「選擇題一」改一下應該會容易理解一些:<br />A)玩一個抽籤遊戲,4長1短5枝籤,只抽一次,抽到長就贏4000元,抽到短就不輸不贏;<br />B)唔抽。直接贏得3000元。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-14764473480528758642016-01-16T14:28:36.443+08:002016-01-16T14:28:36.443+08:00森而意思就係現實中大多數人根本唔確定死亡人數,存活人數呢啲統計數字,正如幾多人因為買高息股而輸錢,輸...森而意思就係現實中大多數人根本唔確定死亡人數,存活人數呢啲統計數字,正如幾多人因為買高息股而輸錢,輸幾多,根本冇統計?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-79074410012838316512016-01-16T14:06:35.932+08:002016-01-16T14:06:35.932+08:00只係巴郡唔派息,如果連巴郡都派息,唔計股息稅因素,我相信都大把人買巴郡
其實同股收息,同買樓收租應...只係巴郡唔派息,如果連巴郡都派息,唔計股息稅因素,我相信都大把人買巴郡<br /><br />其實同股收息,同買樓收租應該都係同一樣道理<br />當市平穩冇乜波幅 就收息養戰,有d波幅出現就炒波幅獲利生命作賭注https://www.blogger.com/profile/07422586838707301273noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-15307613603297217692016-01-16T13:49:46.168+08:002016-01-16T13:49:46.168+08:00這個理論之所以受到重視,正正是因為太貼近現實了。如果將題目裡的輸錢贏錢改為死亡人數和存活人數,就是很...這個理論之所以受到重視,正正是因為太貼近現實了。如果將題目裡的輸錢贏錢改為死亡人數和存活人數,就是很多大型災難或疫症所面臨的救援方案撰擇,若只按直覺撰擇,恐怕很難以一句現實同理論的分別去面對200條人命。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4243434211633405626.post-64333778894165915112016-01-16T13:47:58.313+08:002016-01-16T13:47:58.313+08:00呵。池某的爛文多一篇也許只是污染(投資)環境罷了,但這個實驗對Daniel Kahneman絕對是重...呵。池某的爛文多一篇也許只是污染(投資)環境罷了,但這個實驗對Daniel Kahneman絕對是重要的,Kahneman就是靠這個理論拿到2002年諾貝爾經濟獎的。池裡漁https://www.blogger.com/profile/11162570051240423987noreply@blogger.com