Saiba o que e como avaliar. A relao Risco x Retorno um dos conceitos mais importantes que voc precisa saber sobre investimentos. Infelizmente, a grande maioria dos investidores olha apenas para um lado da equao, o retorno. Para eles, o que interessa descobrir qual o ativo com maior retorno, independente do nvel de risco desse ativo. Nesse artigo espero deixar claro que compreender o conceito de risco como volatilidade e entender o porqu geralmente um maior retorno est ligado a um maior risco. Continue lendo esse artigo para Analisar dois simples exemplos que ilustram a relao risco x retorno. Entender o que Break Even e sua importncia. Warren Buffett Epub' title='Warren Buffett Epub' />Risco x Retorno Exemplo 1. Suponha que eu oferea a voc duas opes Opo 1 Receber R 9. Opo 2 9. 5 de chance de ganhar R 1. R 1. 0. 0. 00. Eu tenho praticamente certeza de que voc escolheu a opo 1, recebendo os R 9. Entretanto, ambas as opes tem o mesmo valor esperado de R 9. O que diferencia estas escolhas e faz voc escolher a primeira opo o fato do retorno ser garantido, ou seja, sem nenhum risco envolvido. A preferncia pela opo mais segura mostra a tendncia do ser humano a certo nvel de averso ao risco. Praticamente todas as pessoas possuem uma averso ao risco, sendo que umas so mais avessas ao risco do que outras. Risco x Retorno Exemplo 2. Esse segundo exemplo envolve uma situao parecida, porm, com 2 ativos apresentando uma mesma mdia de retorno ao longo de 5 anos. Suponha que dois ativos possuem o mesmo retorno mdio de 1. Entretanto, o ativo 1 apresentou a seguinte sequncia de retorno ao longo de 5 anos Retornos Ativo 1 2. Mdia 1. 0J o ativo 2 apresentou esses retornos no mesmo perodo Retornos Ativo 2. Mdia 1. 0Qual ativo voc escolheriaIts hard not to respect Andrew Hallam. I first learned about him in the pages of MoneySense, where he described how his investment club made up of fellow teachers. The Intelligent Investor by Benjamin Graham PDF Book, By Benjamin Graham, ISBN 0060555661, Genres Business. A escolha natural seria escolher o ativo 2 correto Afinal, os retornos do ativo 2 so mais garantidos do que o retorno do ativo 1. Entretanto, provvel que algum tenha escolhido o ativo 1 alegando que o retorno o mesmo entre ambos os ativos. Latest Windows Live Essentials 2012 Full Offline Setup Installer. Logo, indiferente escolher entre o ativo 1 e o ativo 2. Porm, o retorno no o mesmo E a diferena grandeNote que estamos analisando a mdia dos retornos. Se cada carteira comeasse com R 1. R 1. 44,1. 4. J a carteira de R 1. R 1. 60,8. 3. a diferena entre ganhar 6. Veja a imagem abaixo para comparar os 2 ativos Note que o retorno composto anual do ativo 2 9,9. Entretanto, apesar do retorno mdio do Ativo 1 tambm ser de 1. Mas o que explica essa diferena nos resultados, se a mdia dos retornos a mesma Conhea o Ponto de Equilbrio Break EvenFaa as contas Se voc comea com R 1. R 8. 0,0. 0 corretoE para voltar para o patamar inicial R 1. Se voc respondeu 2. R 9. 6,0. 0. A resposta correta seria 2. Cover-2D/9783898796972.jpg.400x0_q85.jpg' alt='Warren Buffett Epub' title='Warren Buffett Epub' />Livros Relacionados. Faa como Warren Buffett Mary Buffett Baixar ou Ler Online Bilionrios Por Acaso A Criao Do Facebook Ben Mezrich. The solar eclipse is rapidly approaching and, for the towns that happen to be in the narrow 70mile band of best observation, this means gearing up for quite the. Se voc perder 5. Quanto maior a perda, maior ser o ganho necessrio para o ponto de equilbrio zero a zero. O grfico tem uma proporo exponencial que chega a assustarLogo, como o ativo 1 obteve perdas nos dois primeiros anos desta anlise, tornou se mais difcil para esse ativo manter o mesmo retorno acumulado em relao ao ativo 2. Tecnicamente, quanto maior a variao do retorno de um ativo maior risco, maior ser a diferena entre seu retorno mdio e o retorno composto. Logo, como o ativo 1 possui uma variao muito maior do que o ativo 2, seu retorno acumulado e composto menor do que o ativo 2. No toa que Warren Buffett diz a seguinte frase sobre investimentos Regra 1 Nunca perca dinheiro. Regra 2 Nunca esquea a Regra 1. Concluso. Esse breve artigo uma pequena parte do captulo 2 do e. Book sobre alocao de ativos que lanarei no dia 1. Embora essa introduo seja bsica, esse captulo 2 sobre risco um dos pilares do e. Book e talvez tenha sido o que mais demandou minhas energias para escrever. Escrever sobre temas como volatilidade, desvio padro, simulao de cenrios de stress em uma linguagem simples e direta ao pequeno investidor sem perder a relevncia do tema foi minha principal meta nesse captulo e acredito ter cumprido muito bem aps longas noites de trabalho. No More Dupes Serial Number more. Dentro desse captulo 2 sobre Risco voc encontrar Um pouco de latim para explicar risco ex ante e ex post. A influncia dos riscos ocultos nos investimentosEstudo de Caso O problema do peso mexicano. O Risco como Volatilidade Desvio PadroJogos de Cara e Coroa para explicar risco de forma simples. Retorno e Risco de diversos ativosndice de Sharpe. Simulando Cenrios de Stress. Todos esses pontos em apenas 1 dos 7 captulos que compem o e. Book. Aqui est uma imagem do e. Book sobre esse captulo 2 RiscoNo toa que a chamada para esse captulo a seguinte Risco Ignore o por conta prpria ou aprenda de uma vez por todas o que ele e nunca mais acorde s 4h da manh pensando em sua carteira de investimentos. Se voc j passou pela crise de 2. Confesso que estou ansioso para o lanamento do e. Book nessa tera feira Trarei mais detalhes atravs da lista de emails e aqui mesmo no blog. Forte Abrao Henrique Carvalho Atualizado O e. Book Alocao de Ativos j foi publicado e voc pode saber mais sobre ele AQUI. I, Cringely Whats happening at IBM its dyingThis is a column I didnt want to write. Like many of you I am tired of IBM stories and the company that was once an industry leader has become, at best, a poster child for how not to manage the later stages of a corporate life cycle. But because whats happening at IBM is also happening right now at hundreds of other big technology companies makes it worth covering. So let me be clear IBM is dying. Last week a huge round of layoffs hit IBM just as I predicted back in January. The company is releasing as few details as possible. Nobody, for example, knows exactly how big is this layoff how many people are being let go IEEE Spectrum found one source that said the number was 3. U. S. IBM workforce, a number which IBM says is too high. I also believe 3. This round of IBM layoffs looks to me to be in the 2. A similar number of IBM workers were let go last year, but what makes this years numbers so notable is that most are regular employees not contractors or retirees those were mainly dumped last year to make those layoffs look lower. With IBM U. S. employment in the 9. IBM. And they did so under new rules that grant at most one month of severance pay instead of up to 2. That has to be a kick in the head to all the IBM old timers who had been waiting for the axe to fall no matter how good they were at their jobs, yet hoping for some kind of package. Well the package is here and it is full of crap. The IBMers I hear from, and there are lots of them, are generally either pissed off or scared. But its frankly far too late to save the IBM they remember. That company has been gone for years. The best they can hope for is a little clarity and leverage concerning the terms under which they are being shown the door. It looks like IBM isnt being clear about their options with those on the layoff list and Ill be covering that in another column this week. But for now I want to explain why I say that IBM is dying. Big Blue is in transition they say. Old businesses like mainframes and midrange systems are giving way to cloud, analytics, mobile, social, and security. The company has done this before many times. Gone are the card sorters and typewriters for example. The theory is that IBM will emerge like Doctor Who from this latest transformation, a new company headed for even greater things. During such a transition time the job of the CEO is to starve the old businesses to feed the new ones. IBM CEO Ginni Rometty has done this in spades because she has the added job of keeping Wall Street happy, which means increasing dividends and share buybacks no matter the actual economics of her business. Its all done with the idea that the new businesses will more than make up for the old. But what if they dontThe largest shareholder of IBM is Warren Buffetts Berkshire Hathaway with over eight percent. In one sense you might think that Buffett would worry about IBMs stock spiral. On the contrary, a few months ago Buffett explained that as a long term shareholder who ideally would never sell, falling share prices are actually good because it allows him to buy even more shares on the way down and own that much more of the company when it comes back up. But right before this round of layoffs Warren Buffett began to change his tune on IBM. He was dour when asked about it and said his partner Charlie Munger was already bearish on IBM. It was a dramatic change of attitude that led to this peculiar clip of CNBCs Jim Cramer trying to explain it What happened What turned Buffet aroundSurely not this one layoff IBM has been doing these for years, though never so brutally. The only event that I can see causing this change in Warren Buffett is Ginni Rometty disclosing to her largest shareholder that the basic premise of transition and renewal isnt working. Things aren t going well at all in cloud, analytics, mobile, social and security land. When those kick in if they kick in IBM will be just one company in a crowd with no particular advantage over the others. IBM used to be able to count on its size, its people, its loyal customers, but all of those are going or gone. Apple or Google could buy IBM with cash on hand, so its no longer the Big Kahuna. IBMers of yore are all gone and for the current breed its just another job. IBM customers are leaving in droves, too. Of the whole CAMSS suite only security is an obvious success and the world isn t ready for a 1. IBM isnt KODAK or XEROX as one reader asked. Its not that IBM stuck too long with an old technology or developed new ones it then chose not to sell. A better analogy for IBM is the original AT T a company that spent huge amounts trying to reinvent itself as a cable company and a wireless company only to finally sell itself to SBC for 1. More on this tomorrow.