The comparison of overall portfolio performance, from best to worst, based on weighted mean RORs is Portfolio 3, Portfolio 2, Portfolio 1.
Upon calculating the weighted means for each portfolio's Rate of Return (ROR), we can assess their overall performance. Portfolio 3 exhibited the highest weighted mean ROR at 4.92%, indicating superior performance. In contrast, Portfolio 2 follows with a moderately favorable performance, boasting a weighted mean ROR of 2.02%.
Lastly, Portfolio 1 lags behind with the lowest weighted mean ROR, standing at 1.85%. This analysis suggests that investors in Portfolio 3 experienced the best returns, while those in Portfolio 2 also saw positive returns, albeit to a lesser extent. On the other hand, investors in Portfolio 1 encountered comparatively lower returns.
Therefore, the order of overall performance, from best to worst, is Portfolio 3, Portfolio 2, and Portfolio 1. Investors seeking optimal returns might find Portfolio 3 more appealing, considering its higher weighted mean ROR.
| Portfolio | Weighted Mean ROR |
| --- | --- |
| Portfolio 3 | 4.92% |
| Portfolio 2 | 2.02% |
| Portfolio 1 | 1.85% |
Therefore, the list that shows the comparison of the overall performance of the portfolios, from best to worst is:
Portfolio 3, Portfolio 2, Portfolio 1