Assign to Riddhi
Element Type of Assessment Word Limit % of Total Marks Submission Method Final Submission Date Course Work: Investment Portfolio 1 x 4,000 word Turnitin submission 4,000 Turnitin®UK Grademark (Links to an external site.) Canvas Rationale for assessment design: Investment brokers and agents require high level investment, market and economic information to manage and run high net worth investment funds. In order to become successful investors, agents require understanding and appreciation of a number of trading and hedging strategies, including the timeliness of such those strategies. The assessment, by making use of real life investment and stock market data via the Bloomberg Terminal, will require students to make a number of strategic investment decisions. This outward facing, practical assessment will pit students' knowledge and understanding of a number of investment and hedging strategies, including decision making and problem solving using real life financial data. Links to module learning outcomes: This module, like all modules at Anglia Ruskin, is taught on the basis of achieving intended learning outcomes. On successful completion of the assessment, the student will be expected to be able to demonstrate the following: Knowledge and understanding Intellectual, practical, affective and transferable skills LO 1. Critically evaluate the principles, processes and practices underpinning financial markets and related activities LO 2. Analyse the different methods of investment and practices available in different contexts and time frames, making recommendations where appropriate LO 3. Critically assess the mechanisms for determining investment risk and foreign currency valuation, equity and bond markets Assessment information: You have recently been hired as an investment manager at a local hedge fund. You have been assigned your first client who has a sum of £10,000 to be all invested immediately for a period of 10 years. The client expresses their desire to earn a minimum return of 14% per annum and to minimize their risk. Your client instructed you to invest the fund in international markets. You decided to create a portfolio of at least 15 Global Equities chosen from a minimum of three Global Stock Exchanges. a) Discuss your investment return and risk objectives and investment strategy b) Discuss how you constructed your investment portfolio and selected shares? You need to critically evaluate the methods you used. c) How did you manage the risks of your investment portfolio? d) What is the impact of exchange rate volatility and market risk on your chosen portfolio? All forms of assessment must be submitted by the published deadline which is detailed above. It is your responsibility to know when work is due to be submitted – ignorance of the deadline date will not be accepted as a reason for late or non-submission. Any late work will NOT be considered and a mark of zero will be awarded for the assessment task in question. You are requested to keep a copy of your work (excluding exams). How your assessment is graded: Areas Marks Explanations and discussions of the investment risk and return objectives and Investment strategy 10 Critical evaluations and discussions of the theories and methods used in constructing investment portfolio and selecting shares. 40 Applications and explanations of theories and techniques used in managing risks of investment portfolio. 20 Discussions the impact of exchange rate volatility and market risk on the investment portfolio 20 Scholarly skills, including referencing, use of scholarly language, structure, presentation 10 Total 100 Submission Go to Submission and Feedback to see details of how to submit. ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY GENERIC ASSESSMENT CRITERIA LEVEL 7 Level 7 is characterised by an expectation of students’ expertise in their specialism. Students are semi-autonomous, demonstrating independence in the negotiation of assessment tasks (including the major project) and the ability to evaluate, challenge, modify and develop theory and practice. Students are expected to demonstrate an ability to isolate and focus on the significant features of problems and to offer synthetic and coherent solutions, with some students producing original or innovative work in their specialism that is worthy of publication or public performance or display. Mark Bands Outcome Generic Learning Outcomes (GLOs) (Academic Regulations, Section 2) Knowledge & Understanding Intellectual (thinking), Practical, Affective and Transferable Skills Characteristics of Student Achievement by Marking Band 90-100% Achieves module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level Exceptional analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics with very clear originality and autonomy. Exceptional development of conceptual structures and argument making an exceptional use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a very high level of intellectual rigour and consistency. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and may be considered for external publication Exceptional analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Exceptional development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Exceptional research skills, independence of thought, an extremely high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, exceptional expressive/professional skills, and substantial creativity and originality. Exceptional academic/intellectual skills. Work pushes the boundaries of the discipline and may be considered for external publication 80-89% Outstanding analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics with clear originality and autonomy. Outstanding development of conceptual structures and argument making an exemplary use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a very high level of intellectual rigour and consistency Outstanding analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Very high level development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Outstanding research skills, independence of thought, a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, outstanding expressive/professional skills, and considerable creativity and originality. Exemplary academic/intellectual skills 70-79% Excellent analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Excellent development of conceptual structures and argument making excellent use of scholarly conventions. Demonstrates independence of thought and a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency Excellent analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. High level development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions. Excellent research skills, independence of thought, a high level of intellectual rigour and consistency, excellent expressive/ professional skills, and considerable creativity and originality. Excellent academic/intellectual skills, and considerable creativity and originality 60-69% Good analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Development of conceptual structures and argument making consistent use of scholarly conventions Good analysis of key issues/concepts/ethics. Development of conceptual structures and argument, making consistent use of scholarly conventions 50-59% Satisfactory knowledge of key issues/ concepts/ethics in discipline. Descriptive in parts but some ability to synthesise scholarship and argument. Minor lapses in use of scholarly conventions Satisfactory knowledge of key issues/ concepts/ethics in discipline. Descriptive in parts but some ability to synthesise scholarship and argument. Minor lapses in use of scholarly conventions 40-49% A marginal pass in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level Basic knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Generally descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and little argument. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent Basic knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Generally descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and little argument. Use of scholarly conventions inconsistent. 30-39% A marginal fail in module outcome(s) related to GLO at this level. Possible compensation. Satisfies qualifying mark Limited knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Largely descriptive, with restricted synthesis of existing scholarship and limited argument. Limited use of scholarly conventions. Limited research skills impede use of learning resources and problem solving. Significant problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/ Professional skills not yet secure. Weak academic/ intellectual skills. Limited use of scholarly conventions 20-29% Fails to achieve module outcome(s) related to this GLO. Qualifying mark not satisfied. No compensation available Little evidence of knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Largely descriptive, with little synthesis of existing scholarship and little evidence of argument. Little evidence of use of scholarly conventions. Little evidence of research skills, use of learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with structure/ accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills virtually absent. Very weak academic/intellectual skills. Little evidence of use of scholarly conventions 10-19% Inadequate knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Wholly descriptive, with inadequate synthesis of existing scholarship and inadequate argument. Inadequate use of scholarly conventions. Inadequate use of research skills, learning resources and problem solving. Major problems with structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills absent. Extremely weak academic/intellectual skills. Inadequate use of scholarly conventions 1-9% No evidence of knowledge of key issues/concepts/ethics in discipline. Incoherent and completely but poorly descriptive, with no evidence of synthesis of existing scholarship and no argument whatsoever. No evidence of use of scholarly conventions. No evidence of use of research skills, learning resources and problem solving. Incoherent structure/accuracy in expression. Team/Practical/Professional skills non-existent. No evidence of academic/intellectual skills. No evidence of use of scholarly conventions 0% Awarded for: (i) non-submission; (ii) dangerous practice and; (iii) in situations where the student fails to address the assignment brief (e.g.: answers the wrong question) and/or related learning outcomes