Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
These latter two are a short risk reversal position. So: Underlying − risk reversal = Collar. The premium income from selling the call reduces the cost of purchasing the put. The amount saved depends on the strike price of the two options. Most commonly, the two strikes are roughly equal distances from the current price.
In statistics, the two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) is an extension of the one-way ANOVA that examines the influence of two different categorical independent variables on one continuous dependent variable. The two-way ANOVA not only aims at assessing the main effect of each independent variable but also if there is any interaction between them.
Principal component analysis (PCA) is a widely used method for factor extraction, which is the first phase of EFA. [4] Factor weights are computed to extract the maximum possible variance, with successive factoring continuing until there is no further meaningful variance left. [4]
The difference between the two sample means, each denoted by X i, which appears in the numerator for all the two-sample testing approaches discussed above, is ¯ ¯ = The sample standard deviations for the two samples are approximately 0.05 and 0.11, respectively. For such small samples, a test of equality between the two population variances ...
Rainbow option is a derivative exposed to two or more sources of uncertainty, [1] as opposed to a simple option that is exposed to one source of uncertainty, such as the price of underlying asset. The name of rainbow comes from Rubinstein (1991), [ 2 ] who emphasises that this option was based on a combination of various assets like a rainbow ...
As with the small multiple chart, each panel uses the same underlying two-dimensional space, but in this case that is a geographic space. Typically, the variables being mapped are of a similar type, such as types of agricultural products, so that the same strategy of map symbol can be used on each panel, enabling rapid comparison between the maps.
There are just two systems underlying System 1 and System 2 processing. There are clearly more than just two cognitive systems underlying people's performance on dual-processing tasks. Hence the change to theorizing that processing is done in two minds that have different evolutionary histories and that each have multiple sub-systems.
These two non-atomic examples are closely related: a sequence (x 1, x 2, ...) ∈ {0,1} ∞ leads to the number 2 −1 x 1 + 2 −2 x 2 + ⋯ ∈ [0,1]. This is not a one-to-one correspondence between {0,1} ∞ and [0,1] however: it is an isomorphism modulo zero, which allows for treating the two probability spaces as two forms of the same ...