Sunday, February 28, 2016

Running The Numbers...

Le Pew?
NCUA statistical and econometric machinations are coming under increasing scrutiny. The strong whiff of "quantitative manipulation" and "political calibration" 
is becoming a "statistical stench". Not an unusual suspicion - nor ultimate outcome - for any organization which views itself as immune from, and unaccountable to the people it serves. 

"Stochastic" Wild Ass Guess!
NCUA has no published, rigorously challenged, standard baseline for its "analyses" of individual credit unions, nor the industry as a whole. Predictions and forecasts are at best presumptive, with no independent internal nor external challenge; which might be acceptable, if NCUA's gnomadic robusterians were "world class rated". No such ratings have as yet been identified. 

If there is no baseline, one might infer their analyses are baseless - right?       

Of equal note, NCUA most frequently focuses on comparisons of peer groups, cohort segments, regression analysis, normalizing "bell curves", computing historical trends and calculating medians - all variations on computing an average - that little bit of arithmetic even you and I mastered in third grade!

Here's an important refresher for you on "averages":




"On average, being mediocre is less than good!"

That's true for credit unions; and equally true for "gnomadic robusterians" and their practices! 

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Jim. Good point.
Speaking of accountability.
It's been a while since McWatters splashed onto the CU scene.
Let's Mark Mark to Market.
At this juncture can we say Mark is a squeaky wheel that continues the bipartisan dysfunction that has become the gvt tradeMARK?
Or, will he still leave. MARK?
With the happy pronouncements from ncya on more settlements, how's about Mark digging into the REAL math of the whole CCU mess, like he said he would?
What do you say Mark?