For example, say I invest in a 5-year certificate of deposit at 3% annually. Let's assume the bank delivers on time (no defaults). However, a month after I buy it, another bank offered a 4% 5-year ...
In the video, Rick Van Ness states the following scenario: Stock A has a 7% return with +/- 1% risk Stock B has a 3.5% return with +/- 0.5% risk Stock A and B are perfectly negatively correlated. ...
I think bonds are debt/loan and fixed-income, so they are risk-free, both short term and long term. But it seems like Bodie's Investment thinks long-term bonds are risky: For example, assume that ...
Is it always sane to follow inaction if the only alternative investment carries a risk of higher than 50% to end up with loss?
Or is there a theory that proposes inaction is worse?