Group 1 - The article discusses the importance of considering both returns and risks when making investment decisions, highlighting that focusing solely on returns can be dangerous [4][6] - It introduces the Sharpe Ratio as a key metric that helps investors evaluate the "cost-effectiveness" of their investments by considering both returns and risks [8][9] - The Sharpe Ratio is defined as the ratio of excess return (returns above the risk-free rate) to the volatility of the investment, where the risk-free rate is typically represented by short-term government bond yields [13][15][19] Group 2 - An example is provided comparing two funds: Fund A with a 15% return and Fund B with a 20% return, emphasizing that Fund A may be a better choice due to its lower volatility risk [21][23] - The article notes that investors do not need to calculate the Sharpe Ratio themselves, as it is usually provided in the product descriptions of both public and private funds [24] - It outlines that a Sharpe Ratio below 0 indicates that the investment is underperforming compared to risk-free assets, suggesting that such investments should be avoided [25] Group 3 - The article warns against comparing Sharpe Ratios across different strategies, as they have inherently different risk-return characteristics [27] - It emphasizes the importance of using a longer time frame (3-5 years) for evaluating the reliability of the Sharpe Ratio, as shorter periods may not capture complete market cycles [29] - The article concludes that while the Sharpe Ratio is a valuable tool, it should not be the sole metric for investment decisions; other dimensions should also be considered [31][32]