Sentences with phrase «what other correlations»

Not exact matches

Before I do that, I decided to look into two questions regarding bitcoin's role in a portfolio: What is bitcoin's correlation with other financial assets?

But for intra-day and other short - term traders, what is the correlation like?

Notice what happens to gold's correlation to other asset classes when the economy moves from economic expansion to contraction (data from 1987 through 2015)...

As our study has consistently shown over the past eight years, there is no long - term correlation between the amount of money a company spends on its innovation efforts and its overall financial performance; instead, what matters is how companies use that money and other resources, as well as the quality of their talent, processes, and decision making.

In other words, it's not as simple as merely a one - for - one correlation, of black - and white theological statements made smugly about «who God is» and what He is like.

There is a correlation, but what I don't know for sure is how strong the causal link is in amongst all the other things which may go into making up what we would call «authority».

Also, Im not believing what the Bible says as truth flat out, I take certain parts, and see the correlation with all the other books.

It is fun to speculate and apply probabilities, correlations, and historical context to what might actually have been said by Jesus but all we know for sure is that the gospels were written by people other than Jesus — and people that in all probability never even met Jesus.

There is clearly a correlation between what people think important and what they are willing to spend money on, and the notoriously low salaries of ministers in comparison with those in other skilled professions may be an index of ill health.

In other words, how or where or what you do about your child sleeping when they're a baby has little correlation with your lives when your child is 6.

What is funny is that the Paleo eating pattern due to the high protein content is one that is strongly associated with bodybuilding, powerlifting, cross-fit activities, and Paleo - pushers are the very first to start shouting «correlation does not equal causation» at the top of their lungs as if they were saying some damning to evidences of the healthfulness of other eating patterns such as plant - based.

In his book «The China Study», T. Colin Campbell himself, explicitly acknowledges the difficulty in proving as fact the direct cause of any disease and in this regard explains the relationship between correlation and causation and that one does not prove the other, contrary to what Ms. Minger infers.

Correlation is not causation of course, and there are so many other possible culprits that we're still teasing apart what affects what, but it's hard to believe that the steady decline in health that began around the time industrial oils were introduced is 100 % unrelated to this dietary change — so why give it the benefit of the doubt, when these problems were much fewer 100 years ago?

Some think the standards gave clarity on what was expected of teachers and students; others say there is little correlation between well - written standards and student performance.

In the end, what can be more fairly and appropriately asserted from this research report is that the Marzano model is indeed correlated with value - added estimates, and their correlation coefficients fall right in line with all other correlation coefficients evidenced via other current studies on this topic, again, whereby researchers have correlated multiple observational models with multiple value - added estimates.

Indeed this is true, although the correlations they observed, as aligned with what is increasingly becoming a saturated finding in the literature (see similar findings about the Marzano observational framework here; see similar findings from other studies here, here, and here; see also other studies as cited by authors of this study on p. 13 - 14 here), is that the magnitude and practical significance of these correlations are «very weak» (e.g., r =.18) to «moderate» (e.g., r =.45,.46, and.48).

What this means in practice is that when correlations are this «weak,» it is reasonable to say statements about averages, for example, that «on average» as one variable increases the mean of the other variable increases, but it would not be prudent or wise to make predictions for individuals based on these data.

What is frightening, however, is not only how easy it is to slip into a «shame cycle,» but also the correlation between shame and addiction, mental illness, and other serious issues.

What's more, they tend to have a low correlation with each other over the long term, as each factor is driven by very different investor behaviors or structural anomalies (Source: MSCI 12/31/14).

Based on what we have observed in other markets, [5] value portfolios and quality portfolios tend to have low correlation in performance and tend to exhibit distinct cyclicality.

What's important is their correlation with each other: the goal is to combine stocks in a way that results in a portfolio with the lowest possible volatility.

The importance of correlation in the investing world comes from the simple (and Nobel Prize winning) insight that since investors naturally seek to minimize risk, what they should do is construct portfolios with assets that have as low a correlation with each other as possible.

Great list, I know about 10 of them, can't wait to check out the other blogs I wonder if there is a good correlation between the blogs actual value to the client and it's ranking and what would happen if you take other factors such as facebook likes, number of comments and so on.

Although all indications like sunspot (group) number, sun cycle length, TSI, AA index, GCR, 10Be, 14C all have a good correlations with each other on long term, short term differences make it rather difficult to decide what is the best indication for the sun - earth climate connection.

Strong correlation between the Arctic temperature anomaly and averaged strength of the geomagnetic field (R2 > 0.8) is not necessarily proof of causation, but it is stronger than what Dr. Soon proposes, on the other hand Dr. Schmidt and Dr. Svalgaard, pursuing their own different agendas, may wish to discredit.

Your statement «may» be true, but what evidence do you have — other than correlation?

You have presented absolutely no data to support either your contention that there is no correlation nor showing what correlation would be expected once one fully includes other factors.

hank at 107 says, regarding AMOC slowdown: «If there's a correlation to something we take seriously, say how many codfish are caught, or how late Spring comes, or how late blizzards happen, that'll emerge once people try to correlate what they found about the AMOC with what's known about those other things.»

If there's a correlation to something we take seriously, say how many codfish are caught, or how late Spring comes, or how late blizzards happen, that'll emerge once people try to correlate what they found about the AMOC with what's known about those other things.

(p. 128) He touches on the work of a number of philosophers focusing on what he calls a «post-Cartesian juncture» (p. 32) and explores the difficult task of uncovering meaning in a contemporary context where «signifiers may refer to other signifiers ad infinitum with no necessary correlation to a signified.»