The accompanying data file shows the annual returns (in %) for a mutual fund focusing on investments in Latin America and a mutual fund focusing on investments in Canada over the past 25 years. Click here for the Excel Data File a. Which fund had the higher reward over this time period? since it has the b. Which fund was riskier over this time period? since it has the c-1. Given a risk-free rate of 2%, calculate the Sharpe ratio for each fund. What does this ratio imply? Note: Round intermediate calculations to at least 4 decimal places and final answers to 2 decimal places. Sharpe ratio for Latin America Sharpe ratio for Canada c-2. Over this time period, the Sharpe ratio implies that the: O Latin America fund had a higher reward per unit of risk. O Canada fund had a higher reward per unit of risk. O Latin America fund had the higher relative dispersion. ○ Canada fund had the lower relative dispersion. Year Latin America Canada 1994 -23 -12.04 1995 -16.63 19.8 1996 30.66 16.2 1997 33.27 6.59 1998 -37.98 -15.18 1999 55.03 40.33 2000 -17.33 11.91 2001 -6.22 -10.06 2002 -20.89 -4.41 2003 65.43 52.41 2004 41.1 23.6 2005 55.38 28.38 2006 44.1 14.97 2007 43.96 35.05 2008 -55.01 -42.69 2009 92.05 39.82 2010 16.43 21.68 2011 -15.38 -12.65 2012 4.49 8.44 2013 -17.28 9.95 2014 -15.85 3.45 2015 -29.88 -20.41 2016 19.95 20.26 2017 30.51 14.56 2018 -10.62 -14.1
The accompanying data file shows the annual returns (in %) for a mutual fund focusing on investments in Latin America and a mutual fund focusing on investments in Canada over the past 25 years. Click here for the Excel Data File a. Which fund had the higher reward over this time period? since it has the b. Which fund was riskier over this time period? since it has the c-1. Given a risk-free rate of 2%, calculate the Sharpe ratio for each fund. What does this ratio imply? Note: Round intermediate calculations to at least 4 decimal places and final answers to 2 decimal places. Sharpe ratio for Latin America Sharpe ratio for Canada c-2. Over this time period, the Sharpe ratio implies that the: O Latin America fund had a higher reward per unit of risk. O Canada fund had a higher reward per unit of risk. O Latin America fund had the higher relative dispersion. ○ Canada fund had the lower relative dispersion. Year Latin America Canada 1994 -23 -12.04 1995 -16.63 19.8 1996 30.66 16.2 1997 33.27 6.59 1998 -37.98 -15.18 1999 55.03 40.33 2000 -17.33 11.91 2001 -6.22 -10.06 2002 -20.89 -4.41 2003 65.43 52.41 2004 41.1 23.6 2005 55.38 28.38 2006 44.1 14.97 2007 43.96 35.05 2008 -55.01 -42.69 2009 92.05 39.82 2010 16.43 21.68 2011 -15.38 -12.65 2012 4.49 8.44 2013 -17.28 9.95 2014 -15.85 3.45 2015 -29.88 -20.41 2016 19.95 20.26 2017 30.51 14.56 2018 -10.62 -14.1
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
6th Edition
ISBN:9781119256830
Author:Amos Gilat
Publisher:Amos Gilat
Chapter1: Starting With Matlab
Section: Chapter Questions
Problem 1P
Related questions
Question
Transcribed Image Text:The accompanying data file shows the annual returns (in %) for a mutual fund focusing on investments in Latin America and a mutual
fund focusing on investments in Canada over the past 25 years.
Click here for the Excel Data File
a. Which fund had the higher reward over this time period?
since it has the
b. Which fund was riskier over this time period?
since it has the
c-1. Given a risk-free rate of 2%, calculate the Sharpe ratio for each fund. What does this ratio imply?
Note: Round intermediate calculations to at least 4 decimal places and final answers to 2 decimal places.
Sharpe ratio for Latin America
Sharpe ratio for Canada
c-2. Over this time period, the Sharpe ratio implies that the:
O Latin America fund had a higher reward per unit of risk.
O Canada fund had a higher reward per unit of risk.
O Latin America fund had the higher relative dispersion.
○ Canada fund had the lower relative dispersion.
Transcribed Image Text:Year
Latin America
Canada
1994
-23
-12.04
1995
-16.63
19.8
1996
30.66
16.2
1997
33.27
6.59
1998
-37.98
-15.18
1999
55.03
40.33
2000
-17.33
11.91
2001
-6.22
-10.06
2002
-20.89
-4.41
2003
65.43
52.41
2004
41.1
23.6
2005
55.38
28.38
2006
44.1
14.97
2007
43.96
35.05
2008
-55.01
-42.69
2009
92.05
39.82
2010
16.43
21.68
2011
-15.38
-12.65
2012
4.49
8.44
2013
-17.28
9.95
2014
-15.85
3.45
2015
-29.88
-20.41
2016
19.95
20.26
2017
30.51
14.56
2018
-10.62
-14.1
Expert Solution
This question has been solved!
Explore an expertly crafted, step-by-step solution for a thorough understanding of key concepts.
This is a popular solution!
Trending now
This is a popular solution!
Step by step
Solved in 2 steps
Recommended textbooks for you
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
Statistics
ISBN:
9781119256830
Author:
Amos Gilat
Publisher:
John Wiley & Sons Inc
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305251809
Author:
Jay L. Devore
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305504912
Author:
Frederick J Gravetter, Larry B. Wallnau
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
MATLAB: An Introduction with Applications
Statistics
ISBN:
9781119256830
Author:
Amos Gilat
Publisher:
John Wiley & Sons Inc
Probability and Statistics for Engineering and th…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305251809
Author:
Jay L. Devore
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Statistics for The Behavioral Sciences (MindTap C…
Statistics
ISBN:
9781305504912
Author:
Frederick J Gravetter, Larry B. Wallnau
Publisher:
Cengage Learning
Elementary Statistics: Picturing the World (7th E…
Statistics
ISBN:
9780134683416
Author:
Ron Larson, Betsy Farber
Publisher:
PEARSON
The Basic Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319042578
Author:
David S. Moore, William I. Notz, Michael A. Fligner
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman
Introduction to the Practice of Statistics
Statistics
ISBN:
9781319013387
Author:
David S. Moore, George P. McCabe, Bruce A. Craig
Publisher:
W. H. Freeman