Big picture commentCovariance matrix contains more information than correlation matrix:
- You can derive a correlation matrix from a covariance matrix.
- But you cannot derive a covariance matrix using only a correlation matrix! (You also would need the standard deviations.)
Covariance matrices contain all the information of: (i) a correlation matrix plus (ii) a standard deviation vector. In some sense, covariance matrices are the more compact, mathematically convenient object to work with.
Another example using covariance:
I'll bring up a simple finance example that doesn't obviously involve regression:
- Let there be $n$ possible investment assets.
- Let $\Sigma$ be the covariance matrix for the $n$ assets.
- Let $w$ be a vector denoting portfolio weights on the $n$ assets.
Then portfolio variance is given by the matrix equation: $$ w^\top \Sigma w $$
You can't write this formula this succinctly using a correlation matrix.
A portfolio that minimizes variance would be a solution to: $$ \begin{align*} \text{minimize (over $w$) } \quad w^\top \Sigma w \\ \text{ subject to: }\quad\quad \quad w^\top 1 = 1 \end{align*}$$
Note this would be the same as minimizing the standard deviation of portfolio returns.
Covariance turns out to be a rather ubiquitous concept for any problem involving two or more random variables. It comes up all over the place. Better start getting used to it!