## # A tibble: 22,677 x 8
## # Groups: symbol [3]
## symbol date open high low close volume adjusted
## <chr> <date> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
## 1 MSFT 1989-11-07 0.538 0.572 0.536 0.562 131542400 0.363
## 2 MSFT 1989-11-08 0.570 0.587 0.569 0.578 106486400 0.373
## 3 MSFT 1989-11-09 0.583 0.587 0.573 0.582 111526400 0.375
## 4 MSFT 1989-11-10 0.583 0.590 0.582 0.587 59168000 0.379
## 5 MSFT 1989-11-13 0.587 0.613 0.582 0.612 178905600 0.395
## 6 MSFT 1989-11-14 0.616 0.620 0.597 0.601 95241600 0.388
## 7 MSFT 1989-11-15 0.602 0.620 0.599 0.615 94492800 0.397
## 8 MSFT 1989-11-16 0.618 0.620 0.599 0.608 68054400 0.392
## 9 MSFT 1989-11-17 0.609 0.613 0.602 0.603 31651200 0.389
## 10 MSFT 1989-11-20 0.602 0.602 0.587 0.601 56937600 0.388
## # … with 22,667 more rows
## # A tibble: 93 x 3
## # Groups: symbol [3]
## symbol date yearly.returns
## <chr> <date> <dbl>
## 1 MSFT 1989-12-29 0.0741
## 2 MSFT 1990-12-31 0.730
## 3 MSFT 1991-12-31 1.22
## 4 MSFT 1992-12-31 0.151
## 5 MSFT 1993-12-31 -0.0556
## 6 MSFT 1994-12-30 0.516
## 7 MSFT 1995-12-29 0.436
## 8 MSFT 1996-12-31 0.883
## 9 MSFT 1997-12-31 0.564
## 10 MSFT 1998-12-31 1.15
## # … with 83 more rows
Microsoft has the highest expected yearly return. Their expected yearly return is 28.37% where as ^IXIC has 13.37% and Walmart has and extepected return of 15.94%.
## # A tibble: 3 x 2
## symbol returns_avg
## <chr> <dbl>
## 1 ^IXIC 0.134
## 2 MSFT 0.284
## 3 WMT 0.159
In the terms of standard deviation, Microsoft is the riskiest with a standard deviation of 40.85%. Compared to the other two of ^IXIC with 27.73% and WMT with 32.65%.
## # A tibble: 3 x 2
## # Groups: symbol [3]
## symbol sd.1
## <chr> <dbl>
## 1 MSFT 0.408
## 2 ^IXIC 0.277
## 3 WMT 0.326
Calculating standard deviation underestimates the risk. Positive skewness indicates a distribution with an asymmetric tail extending toward more positive values. A distribution with a positive kurtosis value indicates that the distribution has heavier tails than the normal distribution.
## # A tibble: 3 x 2
## # Groups: symbol [3]
## symbol skewness.1
## <chr> <dbl>
## 1 MSFT 0.228
## 2 ^IXIC 0.181
## 3 WMT 1.36
## # A tibble: 3 x 2
## # Groups: symbol [3]
## symbol kurtosis.1
## <chr> <dbl>
## 1 MSFT 0.249
## 2 ^IXIC 0.362
## 3 WMT 1.35
Hint: This is not to be confused with HistoricalVaR you calculated in class. Look for the right code, using tq_performance_fun_options().
Microsoft has the greatest downside risk in terms of VaR. They have a VaR of -.599. This is the greatest loss out of the three stocks.
## # A tibble: 3 x 2
## # Groups: symbol [3]
## symbol VaR
## <chr> <dbl>
## 1 MSFT -0.599
## 2 ^IXIC -0.484
## 3 WMT -0.141
Hint: Make your argument based on the three calculated Sharpe Ratios.
I would choose microsoft because it has the greatest sharpe ratio out of the three.
## # A tibble: 3 x 4
## # Groups: symbol [3]
## symbol `ESSharpe(Rf=2%,p=99… `StdDevSharpe(Rf=2%,p=… `VaRSharpe(Rf=2%,p=…
## <chr> <dbl> <dbl> <dbl>
## 1 MSFT 0.373 0.646 0.440
## 2 ^IXIC 0.196 0.410 0.235
## 3 WMT 0.139 0.428 0.985
Hint: Use message, echo and results in the chunk options. Refer to the RMarkdown Reference Guide.