So the survivorship bias and the backfill bias would be much,much more of a problem in the hedge fund world.

所以生存偏差和回填偏差,会是对冲基金领域里一个相当重大的问题

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

Looking at this particular group, he estimated survivorship bias to be 4.4% per year and backfill bias to be 7.3% per year.

分析这个特定的样本,他估算其生存偏差每年达到4.4%,回填偏差每年达到7.3%

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

So,the combination of survivorship bias and backfill bias for that one year made 4.3 percentage points difference.

因此在生存偏差和回填偏差的共同作用下,造成了两个收益率之间4.3%的差值

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

You've got survivorship bias taking out bad records and then you've got backfill bias adding good records.

生存偏差去掉了那些糟糕的记录,回填误差又加入了一些好的记录

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

Now,more than 130 managers failed because, in addition to survivorship bias, there's something called backfill bias.

其实失败的经理人超过130位,因为除了生存偏差之外,还有称为回填偏差的影响

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

So,we're talking about a group of funds that in aggregate probably produced somewhere in the low teens returns and he's got 11.7% per year combined survivorship bias and backfill bias.

因此我们说这组基金总体上,大概产生了略高于10%的收益率,他算出的数字是每年11.7%,结合了生存偏差和回填偏差

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

Roger Ibbotson took a look at a larger group of funds -3,500--funds over a ten-year period and found survivorship bias at 2.9% per year and backfill bias at 4.6% per year.

罗杰·伊博森研究了更大的样本组,3500支基金10年间的表现,算出其生存偏差是每年2.9%,回填偏差是每年4.6%

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选

In the case of Burt Malkiel's data, more than 11% per year and in the case of Roger Ibbotson's data between 7% and 8% per year of those returns can be explained either by backfill bias or survivorship bias.

在伯特·麦基尔的数据中,超过11%的年平均收益,在罗杰·伊博森的数据中,7%到8%的年平均收益,可以用生存偏差或回填偏差来解释

耶鲁公开课 - 金融市场课程节选