Skip to main content

When forecasting using moving average, if you use a shorter number of periods to calculating the moving average, it will more closely follow the...

The reason we use moving averages in the first place is that a lot of time-series data is noisy; due to errors in data collection or random fluctuations in the real-world phenomenon, the data jumps up and down randomly, obscuring any long-term trends.

A good example of this is GDP (linked below). If you measure GDP growth over very short periods, it goes all over the place; but if you use a moving average over a longer period like a year, a much smoother pattern forms, clearly showing periods of prosperity and recession; and then if you use a moving average over even longer periods like decades, you can see the long-run trend in productivity growth.

The answer is therefore false; if you use a smaller number of periods for your moving average, it will pick up more of the random short-run fluctuations and therefore less of the long-run trend.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Is there a word/phrase for "unperformant"?

As a software engineer, I need to sometimes describe a piece of code as something that lacks performance or was not written with performance in mind. Example: This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. Based on my Google searches, this isn't a real word. What is the correct way to describe this? EDIT My usage of "performance" here is in regard to speed and efficiency. For example, the better the performance of code the faster the application runs. My question and example target the negative definition, which is in reference to preventing inefficient coding practices. Answer This kind of coding style leads to unmaintainable and unperformant code. In my opinion, reads more easily as: This coding style leads to unmaintainable and poorly performing code. The key to well-written documentation and reports lies in ease of understanding. Adding poorly understood words such as performant decreases that ease. In addressing the use of such a poorly ...

Is 'efficate' a word in English?

I routinely hear the word "efficate" being used. For example, "The most powerful way to efficate a change in the system is to participate." I do not find entries for this word in common English dictionaries, but I do not have an unabridged dictionary. I have checked the OED (I'm not sure if it is considered unabridged), and it has no entry for "efficate". It does have an entry for "efficiate", which is used in the same way. Wordnik has an entry for "efficate" with over 1800 hits, thus providing some evidence for the frequency of use. I personally like the word and find the meaning very clear and obvious when others use it. If it's not currently an "officially documented" word, perhaps its continued use will result in it being better documented.