Re: Feldblum

Jennifer_Middough@mercer.com
Tue, 6 Oct 1998 14:13:18 -0500

I it my understanding that what Feldblum means in his third criticism
is that the SD or variance methods are, in his words, mathematically
tractable ways of understanding the concept of risk and do not measure
risk at all.

That being said, if the SD or variance methods did measure risk, they
would only measure relative risk and not absolute risk (this is
criticism #2)

Let me know if this sounds reasonable.


Jennifer

______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Feldblum
Author: Amy.Hoffman@reliancenational.com at uucp
Date: 10/6/98 1:03 PM



I have a question about Feldblum's 3 criticisms of the standard
deviation/variance methods of determining risk loads.

Criticism #2 is that they determine "only relative risk, not absolute
risk".

Criticism #3 is that "these methods determine relative standard deviation
or relative variance, not relative risk."

Don't these statements contradict each other? Am I missing something? Any
clarification would be appreciated.

Thanks.