ALLOCATION AND DIVERSIFICATION CASE STUDY

 

 

You graduated from college and have been working at a job you like. You received some money at graduation and have been saving on a regular basis. You have accumulated $20,000 and have decided to open a Fidelity Brokerage account and begin investing. You have been thinking about the type of portfolio you would want to build and what your investing strategy would be. You considered the following 3 portfolios.
Portfolio I is designed for investors with aggressive growth investment objectives. Such investors seek maximum returns and are willing and able to accept high levels of risk and volatility. Current income is not a factor in this portfolio.
Portfolio II is designed for investors with long-term growth objectives. Such investors seek to enhance the value of their capital over time. They are willing to assume a reasonable level of diversified market risk. Current income is not an important factor for such investors.
Portfolio III is designed as a balanced portfolio for current investment income along with capital preservation and modest growth. The portfolio is allocated between equities and fixed-income securities. This portfolio is best suited for conservative investors or those nearing or already enjoying a retirement lifestyle.
You decided to build your portfolio similar to Portfolio II. You decided on several principles to adhere to when building your portfolio and you landed on the funds listed by the principles.
1. A position in technology because you believe it will boom in coming years ROGSX
2. Total stock market exposure with average risk. FSKAX
3. A high growth fund with a great track record. PRGFX
4. A dividend fund that will add safety in a down market and generates a dividend. DLTNX
5. An emerging markets fund to take advantage of the growth around the world. BEXFX

You have determined to use the 5 mutual funds listed above with these priorities:
• Number one priority is growth, broad exposure to the stock market so USE THAT FUND TO ALLOCATE THE MOST. (30%)
• Number two priority is high growth. USE THAT FUND TO ALLOCATE the next highest percentage (25%)
• Great exposure to technology. USE THAT FUND TO ALLOCATE the next highest percentage. (20%)
• Some exposure to emerging markets. (15%)
• A bond fund can serve as a hedge in bad times. Allocate. (10%)

 

 

TICKER TYPE PURCHASED July 24,2017 CLOSING PRICE ALLOCATION IN DOLLARS
$ ALLOCATION
PERCENTAGE
% 2017 ENDING PRICE
Dec. 6th 2017 $ GAIN/LOSS % GAIN/LOSS
ROGSX TECHNOLOGY $23.87
PRGFX GROWTH $66.29
FSTMX TOTAL MARKET $71.39
BEXFX EMERGING MARKETS $13.76
DLTNX BONDS $10.73
Total $20,000 100%

You have $20,000 to invest

Step 1 Go to Yahoo Finance and review each fund.
Step 2 On the above chart enter the dollar and percentage investment AS STATED ABOVE
Step 3 Enter THE CLOSING PRICE ON Dec. 6th, 2017 for each of the 5 funds.
Step 4 What would you have done differently? ____________________________________________________________________________________________
Step 5 Which TICKER had the greatest percentage increase?_________________________________

Sample Solution

ombatants, never against the innocent. But in the end, the aim is to establish peace and security within the commonwealth. As Vittola’s conclusion: ‘the pursuit of justice for which he fights and the defence of his homeland’ is what nations should be fighting for in wars (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332). Thus, although today’s world has developed, we can see not much different from the modernist accounts on warfare and the traditionists, giving another section of the theory of the just war. Nevertheless, we can still conclude that there cannot be one definitive theory of the just war theory because of its normativity.

Jus post bellum

Finally, jus post bellum suggests that the actions we should take after a war (Frowe (2010), Page 208).
Firstly, Vittola argues after a war, it is the responsibility of the leader to judge what to do with the enemy (Begby et al (2006b), Page 332).. Again, proportionality is emphasised. For example, the Versailles treaty imposed after the First World War is questionably too harsh, as it was not all Germany’s fault for the war. This is supported by Frowe, who expresses two views in jus post bellum: Minimalism and Maximalism, which are very differing views. Minimalists suggest a more lenient approach while maximalist, supporting the above example, provides a harsher approach, punishing the enemy both economically and politically (Frowe (2010), Page 208). At the last instance, however, the aim of war is to establish peace security, so whatever needs to be done can be morally justified, if it follows the rules of jus ad bellum.
In conclusion, just war theory is very contestable and can argue in different ways. However, the estab

This question has been answered.

Get Answer
WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, Welcome to Compliant Papers.