<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Accurate Genomic Prediction Of Human Height · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1709.06489/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1709.06489/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Accurate Genomic Prediction Of Human Height — mentioned by beefman</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=21896698</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1709.06489:21896698</guid><pubDate>Sat, 28 Dec 2019 02:47:03 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;An asset&amp;#x27;s Beta is the product of its market correlation and volatility ratio. Highly volatile assets can have beta near 1 even when they have low market correlation. That&amp;#x27;s why CAPM statistics usually include R-squared along with Beta. More generally, in constructing optimized portfolios, correlations are important, not Betas. To your original point, 30 large firms are generally plenty to capture the market factor, regardless of weighting. For one thing, market-weighted indices are dominated by their top names (the top 30 names in the S&amp;amp;P 500 constitute over 40% of the index presently). More…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1709.06489/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>q-bio.GN</category></item></channel></rss>
