Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T08:21:32.820Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Interpretation of the Geometric Mean: A Note

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

Stewart Hodges  and
Stephen Schaefer
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It has been said [2,4,5,6,7, and 8], and it seems to be widely accepted, that the geometric mean of the price relatives of a group of securities can be interpreted as the return which would have been earned on a portfolio of those securities, managed continuously over time to maintain an equal money investment in each security. This is a theoretical concept which could not be implemented literally by a portfolio manager, but it can still be treated rigorously in a mathematical sense. In a recent paper in this journal Rothstein [8] defined continuous reallocation as the limiting case of a policy which does have an operational definition. He showed that the index corresponding to a policy of the equalization of dollar investments approaches the geometrically averaged index as its limiting value. We shall argue that this interpretation of the geometric mean is a misleading one, since it depends upon assumptions which imply serious market inefficiencies.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 9 , Issue 3 , June 1974 , pp. 497 - 504
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Barrett, J.F., and Wright, D.J.. “A Note on the Random Nature of Stock Market Prices.” Cambridge: University of Cambridge, Department of Control Engineering Working Paper.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Fisher, L. “Some New Stock-Market Indexes.” Journal of Business, vol. 39 (1966), pp. 191–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Ito, K. “Stochastic Integral.” Prac. Imp. Acad., vol. 20 (1948), Tokyo, pp. 519–524.Google Scholar
[4]Jensen, M.C. “Random Walks: Reality or Myth – Comment.” Financial Analysts Journal, vol. 23 (November–December 1967), pp. 77–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Latané, H.A.; Tuttle, D.L.; and Young, W.E.. “Market Indexes and their Implications for Portfolio Management.” Financial Analysts Journal, vol. 27 (September–October 1971), pp. 75–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Marks, P., and Stuart, A.. “An Arithmetic Version of the Financial Times Ordinary Share Index.” Journal of the Institute of Actuaries, vol. 97 (December 1971), pp. 297–324.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Rich, C. D. “The Rationale of the Use of the Geometric Average as an Investment Index.” Journal of the Institute of Actuaries, vol. 74 (1948), pp. 338–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Rothstein, M. “On Geometric and Arithmetic Portfolio Performance Indexes.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, vol. 7 (September 1972), pp. 1983–1992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar