Statistical construction error

August 20, 2011

Yes, the title is meant to have two readings.

The effect

The Numbers Guy, among other examples, talks about the UK Office for National Statistics needing to revise its estimate for the construction sector output because of an error.

Original: 2.3% growth

Corrected: 0.5% growth

Here is the Telegraph article cited by The Numbers Guy.

The cause

The spreadsheet that is used to calculate the statistic was not updated properly.

Questions

Have they not read “Spreadsheet Addiction”?

Why are they not using R?

Does this scare anybody else?

Epilogue

Who would take the repercussions when the bottle is to blame?

from “Down the Mountain” by Robin E. Contreras

Subscribe to the Portfolio Probe blog by Email

Leave a Reply

Related posts

  • November 8, 2011

    What drives the estimates apart? Previously A post by Investment Performance Guy prompted "Variability of volatility estimates from daily data". In my comments to the original post I suggested [...]

  • November 3, 2011

    Investment Performance Guy has a post "Periodicity of risk statistcs (and other measures)" in which it is wondered how valid volatility estimates are from a month of daily returns. [...]

  • October 31, 2011

    Some thoughts and resources regarding a popular fund management buzzword. The idea Given asset categories (like stocks, bonds and commodities) create a portfolio where each category contributes equally to [...]