Which of the following explanations is least likely to explain why Jenkins' stock picks underperform? A) Large stocks have an outsized effect on the benchmark data. B) She is using the mean rather than the median valuation as a benchmark. C) Many stocks in the benchmark group are mispriced. ExplanationCapitalization weights are not an issue unless the benchmark is a cap-weighted index. Jenkins is using an equally-weighted basket of stocks in the same industry (or simple average). Average valuations reflect outliers; medians do not. P/Es can get very high, but can never fall below zero. As such, the outliers are going to trend high, and the median is likely to be considerably lower than the mean. A stock that looks cheap relative to the mean may look expensive relative to the median. Stocks of different sizes often have different average or median valuations. Mispricing of stocks in the benchmark is always a risk.

视频信息

答案文本 复制

视频字幕 复制

Let's analyze why Jenkins' stock picks are underperforming. The question asks which explanation is least likely. Jenkins uses an equally-weighted benchmark where each stock has the same 20% weight, unlike a cap-weighted index where large stocks dominate. Since large stocks don't have outsized effects in her equally-weighted approach, option A is the least likely explanation. Option B is actually a likely explanation for underperformance. When using mean valuation as a benchmark, we face the problem of skewed distributions. P/E ratios can be extremely high but never negative, creating right-skewed data. The mean gets pulled up by high outliers, while the median remains lower. A stock that appears cheap relative to the mean might actually be expensive relative to the median. Option C is also a likely explanation for underperformance. Benchmark mispricing is always a risk in any comparison. If many stocks in the benchmark are systematically overvalued due to market inefficiencies, this creates a false baseline for performance comparison. Jenkins' picks might actually be performing well in absolute terms, but appear to underperform against an inflated benchmark. Comparing all three options, we can see that option A is the least likely explanation. Since Jenkins uses an equally-weighted benchmark, large stocks do not have an outsized effect on the data. Options B and C are both plausible explanations - mean versus median bias and benchmark mispricing are real risks that could cause apparent underperformance. Therefore, the answer is A. In conclusion, the key to this question was understanding benchmark methodology. Jenkins uses an equally-weighted approach where each stock has equal influence, making option A irrelevant. The other options represent real risks in performance analysis. Understanding these nuances is crucial for proper investment performance evaluation and attribution analysis.