Stay in the know with all things Bionic Turtle

## What Is a Z Table?

Functions based on the normal distribution are easy to retrieve in code or excel, so we do not really need z tables anymore, in practice. But we still want to understand the z table. Why? Because the popular exam calculators (TI BA II+ and HP 12c) do not include z table functionality, so we do need to use them to lookup values on the exam (yes, the z table has been provided in recent FRM® exams). But understanding the z table also helps reinforce a basic grasp of random variables. Let’s start with a simple example question which is just my variation on an old FRM exam question:

Assume a random normal variable follows a normal distribution with a mean of 2.30 and a standard deviation of 2.00. What is the probability that this random variable is greater than 5.0?

The same question could be re-phrased into the language of asset returns. Here is same question re-phrased: If an asset’s daily return is normally distributed with mean of 2.30% and daily volatility of 2.00%, what is the probability the asset’s return will be at least 5.0%?

I hope you noticed the phrase “normally distributed?” It comes up often in exams. The normal distribution is rarely realistic, but it is popular for learning purposes due to its special properties and what is called parsimony. Parsimony here refers to the normal conveniently has only two parameters, mean and variance. The first step is to standardize the given value of 5.0 into a Z value (aka, Z score):

Z = (5.0 – 2.3)/2.0 = 1.350.

All we’ve done here is translate a normal variable into a standard normal variable. A standard normal variable has zero mean and variance of one (consequently its standard deviation is also one). The Z value of 1.350 means “The value of 5.0 is 1.350 standard deviations above the mean of 2.30.” Now we can use the common Z table to retrieve the associated probability. Below is a typical cumulative Z-value lookup. Because our Z-value is 1.35, we want to go down the rows until we arrive at 1.3, then we want to go across the columns until we arrive at 0.05. That’s because 1.35 = 1.30 + 0.05. We see here that for Z = 1.35, the probability is 0.9115 or 91.15%. Let’s formalize our answer with some notation:

Pr[X ≤ 5.0 | µ(X) = 2.3 and σ(X) = 2.0] = Pr(Z ≤ 1.350) = 91.15%.

Please notice the shift from X to Z. The first function says “The probability that X is less than or equal to 5.0 conditional on a mean of X equal to 2.3 and standard deviation of X equal to 2.0.” The second function, Pr(Z ≤ 1.350), reflects the normalization (translation) from the normal X to the standard normal Z, and we don’t need to specify the mean or standard deviation of the Z.

The same question could be re-phrased into the language of asset returns. Here is same question re-phrased: If an asset’s daily return is normally distributed with mean of 2.30% and daily volatility of 2.00%, what is the probability the asset’s return will be at least 5.0%?

I hope you noticed the phrase “normally distributed?” It comes up often in exams. The normal distribution is rarely realistic, but it is popular for learning purposes due to its special properties and what is called parsimony. Parsimony here refers to the normal conveniently has only two parameters, mean and variance. The first step is to standardize the given value of 5.0 into a Z value (aka, Z score):

Z = (5.0 – 2.3)/2.0 = 1.350

All we’ve done here is translate a normal variable into a standard normal variable. A standard normal variable has zero mean and variance of one (consequently its standard deviation is also one). The Z value of 1.350 means “The value of 5.0 is 1.350 standard deviations above the mean of 2.30.” Now we can use the common Z table to retrieve the associated probability. Below is a typical cumulative Z-value lookup. Because our Z-value is 1.35, we want to go down the rows until we arrive at 1.3, then we want to go across the columns until we arrive at 0.05. That’s because 1.35 = 1.30 + 0.05. We see here that for Z = 1.35, the probability is 0.9115 or 91.15%. Let’s formalize our answer with some notation:

Pr[X ≤ 5.0 | µ(X) = 2.3 and σ(X) = 2.0] = Pr(Z ≤ 1.350) = 91.15%.

Please notice the shift from X to Z. The first function says “The probability that X is less than or equal to 5.0 conditional on a mean of X equal to 2.3 and standard deviation of X equal to 2.0.” The second function, Pr(Z ≤ 1.350), reflects the normalization (translation) from the normal X to the standard normal Z, and we don’t need to specify the mean or standard deviation of the Z.

## Recent Posts

### Week in Financial Education (May 17, 2021)

Welcome to another Week in Financial Education! This week saw some great questions and fascinating insights. I will just highlight the instructive example of a...

### Week in Financial Education (May 10, 2021)

Welcome to the latest week in financial education (WIFE)! As the May exams have started, we experienced another busy week. We are grateful for some...

### Week in Financial Education (May 3, 2021)

Hello, welcome to another WIFE! Our FRM forum was super busy last week. I wrote a long reply to the question (link below) about the...

### What Your Colleagues Are Saying

I took the exam in Sydney and had a similar feeling about the exam being more qualitative (but no less rigorous). However, I felt I was better prepared thanks to the BT's relentless focus on throwing real life examples and methods.

Jagan G.

I subscribed to BT for my Part 1 FRM exam and just wanted to say thanks for the depth and breadth of the study materials and practice questions. I found out that I scored in the top quartile of every topic and I absolutely could not have done this without using BT - I spent many, many hours going over the practice questions and answers! I wanted to express my appreciation and gratitude to your team for your hard work in creating these materials. Thanks!

Shu C.

The BT scripts, practice questions, global topic drills and mock exams were a great help in understanding the concepts (which I could already apply on the job!) and where structured in such a manner that the breadth and depth where optimal for exam preparation - clearly the exam would have been a catastrophe without BT!

Ivan J.

Passed first time. Happy all the hard work paid off. BT was the right choice. Thanks David and Nicole for your work and commitment.

John D.

Passed! 1,4,1,2,1,4! Thank you David and Nicole for your efforts! Thank you BT! Couldn't have done it otherwise. I'm a mechanical engineer who had a career in petroleum services, then I decided to switch career to financial risk management. Passed part 1 from the first time with top quartiles and passed part 2 from the first time as well. All with BT! BT is always the recommendation I give to people aiming at the FRM designation! Thank you again!

Feras S.

Passed Part I and Part II first time - absolutely could not have done it without BT. Like a few others I didn't even both buying the GARP books for Part II and went solely with BT materials. Just read, answered questions, watched videos, read, more questions, and... more questions! All the practice question taking looked to pay off. Thanks again Bionic Turtle for a great curriculum. Keep up the fantastic work!

John D.

## Reach Out Anytime

Not finding what you’re looking for?