Sentences with phrase «returns given your risk»

If you're investing for college, age - based options are designed to give you the best chance at returns given your risk tolerance and time frame.

If you're investing for college, age - based options are designed to give you the best chance at returns given your risk tolerance and time frame.

I would play for higher returns given the risk of inflation.

Not exact matches

«We feel that this kind of investing at this part of the cycle gives us much better risk reward than let's say the broad beta,» or the broader market's return, she said.

Given the hazards, how does one mitigate the risk and be positioned for a better return?

Beyond those basics, you'll get approved more readily and with better terms if you give the banks precisely what they need to make a decision: tax returns and audited (if possible) financial statements (P&L, balance sheets and cash flow) for the year to date and the previous three years; monthly statements for the previous 12 months; a business plan explaining what you do, how you do it and why your company would be a good risk; a detailed projection showing how you will generate the funds to pay down the line; and a backup plan (collateral) to repay the bank if the projections don't pan out.

Here's how: Start with the $ 230,000 asking price (which includes inventory), figure in another $ 70,000 in expansion capital, and then set a goal of a 25 % to 40 % return on capital (appropriate given the venture's risk profile).

Low interest rates have given a huge incentive to shift out of low - risk assets into stocks and corporate bonds in search of higher returns.

Ideally, for any given time period, you want your investment to appear in the upper - left quadrant, as this indicates you've received higher returns for a relatively low amount of risk.

What results is an upward shift in the efficient frontier, providing an enhanced return for a given level of risk, or conversely, a similar return at a lower risk profile.

Based on modern portfolio theory and the efficient frontier, return is maximized for a given level of risk through asset class diversification.

However, within a given portfolio, an investor can maximize return for a given level of risk by diversifying among several uncorrelated asset classes.

Taken in this context, venture capital investing, while in isolation a risky investment style, can provide enhanced returns at a given level of risk.

The efficient frontier is made of portfolios that offer the greatest expected returns for a given level of risk... or vice versa, the lowest risk for a given level of expected returns.

With MPT, investors create portfolios to maximize the expected return based on a given level of risk.

It represents the difference between a fund's actual returns and its expected performance, given its level of risk as measured by beta (see definition of Beta).

If I can achieve a 8 % annual return with relatively low risk, I am allocating as much capital as possible to such an investment given our low interest rate environment.

But unless it was possible to perfectly identify upcoming advances and declines, the best strategy would be to take the investment position having the best average return / risk profile, given the information available.

Still, the current return / risk profile features highly «unpleasant skew» - in any given week, the single most likely outcome is actually a small advance, yet the average return in the current classification is quite negative, because those small marginal gains have typically been wiped out by steep, abrupt market plunges that erase weeks or months of gains in one fell swoop (see Impermanence and Full - Cycle Thinking for a chart).

However, the overall market return / risk climate could become consistent with a more neutral or modestly constructive outlook (with an obligatory safety net in either case, given current valuation extremes) if market internals were to improve decisively.

The annualized percentage difference between a fund's actual returns and its expected performance given its level of market risk, as measured by beta.

Moreover, a sustained move toward higher inflation is a risk to most investors and investment strategies, given that rising inflation has historically been a drag on equity and bond returns, making diversification beyond mainstream asset classes more critical.

Given the risk of early stage investing and venture capital's famously high mortality rate of portfolio companies, it is imperative that fund managers earn high return multiples at these more modest M&A exit values to offset casualties and drive attractive returns.

This tradeoff may not be appealing to some investors — the improvement in risk - adjusted returns may not be worth the cost of giving up total return.

That gives the platform the motivation to find and fund projects that deliver compelling risk - adjusted returns beyond the expected profits — and to monitor them for the life of the project.

Prices move inversely proportional to shifts in economic uncertainty so that expected returns remain essentially the same for a given level of risk.

Aside from acceptable «basis» risk between the stocks we hold long and the indices we use to hedge, and perhaps 1 % of assets in option time - premium at any given time as a result of staggering our strikes to provide a stronger defense, we don't consider various speculative bubbles as threats to our own returns.

Concentrating in only one or two asset classes could possibly give you higher returns, but you'd also likely see much greater risk, which many investors aren't willing to accept.

In my view, such a return would have been both satisfactory and reasonable, given the very low volatility and risk profile of the Fund during the year just ended.

Required yield is the minimum acceptable return that investors demand as compensation for accepting a given level of risk.

Given any particular set of market conditions, we establish our exposure to general market fluctuations based on the average historical return / risk profile those conditions have produced.

Given present market conditions, shareholders can be certain that I will continue to take an even - handed approach to both the risks and potential returns of the markets.

Alpha is a measure of the difference between a portfolio's actual returns and its expected performance, given its level of risk as measured by beta.

, but I think it's a mistake for risk averse or diversified investors to completely give up on high quality bonds because they're worried about poor returns from low yields.

The theory is that, using relationships between risk and return such as alpha and beta, and defining risk as the standard deviation of return, an «efficient frontier» for investing can be identified and exploited for maximum gain at a given amount of risk.

Modern Portfolio Theory was developed in the 1950's with the belief that portfolio returns could be maximized for a given amount of investment risk by combining assets in a particular manner.

Being an accredited investor would give you the privilege to invest in high risk investments like hedge funds, seed money, private placements, angel investment networks and limited partnership; of course this form investment comes with high rate of return on investment (ROI).

In my view, investors who view current valuations as «justified relative to interest rates» are really saying that a decade of zero total returns on stocks is perfectly adequate compensation for the risk of a 45 - 55 % market loss over the completion of the current market cycle - a decline that would historically be merely run - of - the - mill given current valuations, and that certainly can not be precluded by appealing to low interest rates.

Given term premium suppression (via QE) reduced volatility and induced investors to buy risky assets to boost returns, a sustained rise in long - term interest rates would give investors more options to achieve yield targets, thus making risk assets appear less attractive and ultimately erode demands for yield and tighten financial conditions.

Alpha The difference between a fund's actual returns versus its expected performance, given its level of market risk as measured by beta.

In order words, an investor may be taking on more risk than needed to achieve a given level of return.

Our own approach generally aligns our investment outlook with the expected return / risk profile we identify at any given time, so our outlook is hard negative here.

The speech starts by setting out three key themes of the Bank's recent communication about Australia's transition from the resources sector boom to more normal economic conditions: that the sheer scale of the boom means that this transition is challenging, and that the broader global environment compounds the challenge; that a reasonably successful transition is possible given our economy's positive fundamentals and flexibility; and that monetary policy is doing what it can to help the transition, but that the chances of success would be boosted by a lift in productivity growth and an increase in the expected risk - adjusted rate of return on investment.

Of course, you still give up some expected return, that's the opportunity cost of lower risk, but at least you avoid the efficiency loss of the money market fund.

Alpha: Measures the difference between a portfolio's actual returns and its expected performance, given its level of risk as measured by Beta.

As an accredited investor, this is one area to invest in because non accredited investors can hardly survive this industry because of the high risk despite this is despite the fact that it gives good return on investment in the long run.

Unlike most US universities, the lack of alumni giving overall increases the need for risk / return in investment philosophy.

Given these factors, investors are best served in first considering the risks and benefits to various types of income investments, and then within those classes, seek to optimize their investment returns.

Going back to your post a couple days ago where Bob Brown gave his forecast for equity returns of about 6 % (3.2 % after tax and inflation), if you give up another 2 % + in expense ratio, an investor might as well put their money in long term certificates of deposit and eliminate risk.

Use my analysis to decide the risk / return merits of any given junior mining stock.