Area 51 » Business

198

followers

107 Example Questions (12 closed)

active newest votes

up vote 0 down vote

added by winanga Jul 13 '10 at 21:58

up vote 0 down vote

added by brotchie Jul 15 '10 at 23:21

up vote 0 down vote

added by gappy Jul 16 '10 at 20:42

up vote 0 down vote

added by gappy Jul 16 '10 at 20:54

up vote -1 down vote

added by Shane May 25 '10 at 20:32

closed as off topic by joshdick, Martin Liversage, ciczan, Michael, user8288 Jul 5 '10 at 22:09

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Too subjective and general. – Shane May 25 '10 at 21:17

Would need to indicate asset classes and by what criteria – Jonathan Shore Jul 6 '10 at 19:52

up vote -1 down vote

added by brainimus May 27 '10 at 17:10

closed as off topic by Joel Spolsky, Shane, Dr G, Ted Graham, James Roth Jul 16 '10 at 20:29

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	This is more in the area of financial advice than quantitative finance. – cletus May 27 '10 at 23:07
	Yes, would be better placed on the personal finance site: basicallymoney.com. – Shane May 30 '10 at 14:28

up vote -1 down vote

added by Jaydles May 30 '10 at 2:12

closed as off topic by Joel Spolsky, Peter K., cletus, alexanderpas, Oddthinking Jun 16 '10 at 17:26

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

You should probably spell his name correctly; unless that was part of the joke? – chollida May 30 '10 at 15:07

@jaydles: pardon the ignorance, but who is Jim Cramer? en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Cramer#Investor? – WikiSpeedia hang-around May 30 '10 at 23:40

@Jaydles: Can we rephrase this? I really don't love the grammar. Either change it to be something like "Is Jim Cramer a great investor?" or "Why is Jim Cramer not a good investment advisor?" – Shane Jun 29 '10 at 15:04

Hmm, I don't associate Jim Cramer with quant-ish stuff. IMO, not really appropriate for forum. Now if one presented a statistical analysis of his selections, as Patrick Burn did a few years ago, has some interest. ;) – Jonathan Shore Jul 6 '10 at 19:57

@Shane, I think you've changed it from a clearly off-topic question to more of a confusing question. But there's an editing glitch, and I can't can neither roll it back, nor edit it to what I had before. As a philosophical thought, while I appreciate you posting a comment for a week before editing, I'd be cautious in using editing to change the meaning of a question, particularly one with a good bit of existing community support. No resentment here, just a thought. – Jaydles Jul 15 '10 at 14:46

show 1 more improvement suggestion

up vote -1 down vote

added by Patrick May 31 '10 at 18:31

	Too "personal finance" imho. – cletus Jun 1 '10 at 1:54
	Maybe you are right. I suppose someone could answer that the CFD provider would usually match the overall pooled client position unless they have a view on the market in which case this could be considered prop trading. – Patrick Jun 2 '10 at 23:14

up vote -2 down vote

added by Chris W. Rea May 27 '10 at 3:12

Personal finance question, not quantitative finance. Send questions like this to basicallymoney.com ;-) – Chris W. Rea May 27 '10 at 3:12

up vote -2 down vote

added by Michael Pryor May 27 '10 at 17:20

I think this forum should stay away from "how do you do XYZ in this specific vendor's GUI" – JD Long Jun 2 '10 at 14:29

up vote -2 down vote

added by C. Ross May 27 '10 at 18:43

Bollinger bands are more related to technical analysis than quantitative finance. – Graviton Jun 25 '10 at 3:19

up vote -2 down vote

added by Jon Seigel May 28 '10 at 1:45

closed as off topic by gappy, CodeKiwi, Graviton, user6547, EMP Jul 2 '10 at 6:53

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Would this question really be something like "why is gold so volatile"? – Shane May 29 '10 at 16:27

up vote -2 down vote

added by Patrick May 31 '10 at 18:08

	How is this not on topic? – Patrick Jun 2 '10 at 23:15
	@Patrick "what is Monte Carlo?" is too basic a question imho. – cletus Jun 13 '10 at 4:20
	I think Monte Carlo is actually quite advanced for the majority of people calling themselves "quant" – jilles de wit Jul 9 '10 at 11:44

up vote -2 down vote

added by Patrick May 31 '10 at 18:35

@Patrick, I didn't want to edit your question without being sure what you meant, but this is a little vague as written. Do you mean "structured" products, like a MITT? That would be specific enough to drive clear answers. Without the "structured", even traditional bonds would likely qualify as providing capital protection (assuming we're ignoring issuer/clearinghouse risk, which all products technically have). – Jaydles Jun 1 '10 at 16:18

Thanks @jaydles, so to clarify. I meant the kind of structured investment you can buy that has an exotic payoff whilst still having an element of capital protection. For example a structured note with a basket underlier that will give you some participation in the performance of the basket whilst at the same time having a zero coupon bond for example that will grow back to your initial investment amount by maturity hence giving you limited upside but full protection.... You can make this types of structures in many ways...with barriers or without etc. – Patrick Jun 2 '10 at 23:04

@Patrick, got it. I think you may be gunning for something like, "How are principal-protected notes (or 'Structured Products') most commonly structured?" Once you make clear that it's a structured note, there's a "most common" answer, I think: (A zero coupon bond, plus a call option on some underlying stock, basket, or index.) – Jaydles Jul 13 '10 at 19:32

up vote -2 down vote

added by pteetor Jul 9 '10 at 11:26

Too broad. should be specific to a regulation and to a type of hedgefund – jilles de wit Jul 9 '10 at 11:37

up vote -3 down vote

added by Shane May 25 '10 at 20:32

closed as off topic by chollida, Peter K., alexanderpas, Oddthinking, gappy Jun 18 '10 at 13:45

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	This is clearly very subjective. – Shane May 30 '10 at 13:55
	Very funny though. – allesklar Jun 2 '10 at 10:35
	The point of this question is that it's off-topic since investment tips should not be given out on the site. – Shane Jun 26 '10 at 6:10

up vote -3 down vote

added by Shane May 25 '10 at 20:40

closed as off topic by Joel Spolsky, Peter K., ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells, alexanderpas, Oddthinking Jun 16 '10 at 17:26

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	If we allowed this type of question then what stops every new person from asking it? – chollida May 27 '10 at 18:53
	Absolutely; not of general interest. A better question might be something along the lines of "what kind of skill set is required for x job". – Shane May 30 '10 at 14:27
	Wilmott forum has a very active "Careers" section where basically everyone goes if they want career advice from anonymous people and possibly Dominic Connor. The site proposed here doesn't need to copy this part. – quant_dev Jun 12 '10 at 10:03

up vote -3 down vote

added by Rog May 27 '10 at 6:35

This could be a good question if it was generalized, about why stocks get delisted, etc. rather than about a specific stock. – Shane May 30 '10 at 14:39

up vote -3 down vote

added by coderguy123, edited by WikiSpeedia hang-around Jul 11 '10 at 20:22

	so this question very clearly is the intersection of a StackOverflow question and a quant finance question. It is NOT clear to me where it belongs. It seems the pros/cons part of the question belongs here. But the implementation of the algo in a specific language may not. What do you all think? – JD Long Jun 2 '10 at 14:23
	I think implementation in specific language may not belong here but the algorithm certainly belongs here. – coderguy123 Jun 2 '10 at 18:55
	Quants often spend quite a lot of time discussing technological issues. – quant_dev Jun 12 '10 at 10:09

up vote -3 down vote

added by Jaydles May 28 '10 at 12:39

	Sounds like a question for Google? – Tim Robinson Jul 6 '10 at 20:57
	Agreed. Not something that would generate much discussion. – winanga Jul 13 '10 at 13:33

up vote -3 down vote

added by Jaydles May 28 '10 at 12:40

	This seems too simple and factual for the target audience. – Shane May 31 '10 at 16:08
	It's a little pedestrian, but it's the kind of thing for which an answer would save someone a bit of real Bloomberg and excel time. – Jaydles May 31 '10 at 21:06

up vote -3 down vote

added by Shane Jun 1 '10 at 17:09

closed as off topic by ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells, cletus, joshdick, Rom, knorv Jun 19 '10 at 20:22

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

	Off topic because it's about punditry rather than financial modelling. – ConcernedOfTunbridgeWells Jun 10 '10 at 11:34
	Also off topic because it's speculative about a current event. Ideally on-topic questions should be more timeless (and "googleable"). This would fit more onto a traditional forum discussion model. – Shane Jun 29 '10 at 12:58

up vote -4 down vote

added by Shane May 25 '10 at 20:32

I don't like this question for two reasons: (1) it's subjective and (2) it's too current; there would be no reason to search for this question in the future. – Shane May 30 '10 at 14:01

up vote -4 down vote

added by Shane May 25 '10 at 20:32

closed as off topic by bromfiets, jilles de wit, pteetor, Ioda, Ted Graham Jul 13 '10 at 18:23

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

While Bloomberg is used in finance, this is too specifically technical; would be better served by superuser. – Shane May 25 '10 at 21:16

In my opinion it is indeed more on topic for Super User, but given the narrow field of users of it, I doubt it would get a lot of answers there, besides from people who would be active as well on QF. But the place to be is still SU, for this question. – Gnoupi May 27 '10 at 5:55

I don't think this would work on superuser, either. If it were a decent question, it would actually fit better here - almost every finance pro (at least on the trading side) uses Bloomberg, but a tiny percentage of computer users/experts do, so you'd have more Bloomberg experts (both in nominal and percentage terms) here on the finance site. But it still stinks because it's subjective. How you set up your terminal is entirely dependant on what you need and what you like. There's no decent response that doesn't require a ton more information. – Jaydles May 27 '10 at 13:44

I vote yes, because of all the poeple in the world, I bet the people who visited such a Quant site would be able to answer it. – Michael Pryor May 27 '10 at 17:17

This is actually a question for Bloomberg. Those terminals cost a lot but they come with a lot of support. – cletus May 27 '10 at 23:11

show 3 more improvement suggestions

up vote -4 down vote

added by Shane Jun 1 '10 at 15:14

closed as off topic by quant_dev, cletus, alexanderpas, Stephen Muench, Greg Whitaker Jun 23 '10 at 2:34

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

This is for personal finance. – Shane Jun 1 '10 at 15:14

up vote -4 down vote

added by Noli Jun 25 '10 at 20:05

I'm not convinced that "investment banking" and "quant finance" are close enough to make this an on-topic question. – pteetor Jul 8 '10 at 15:12

up vote -5 down vote

added by Tyler Carter May 27 '10 at 5:11

closed as off topic by Joel Spolsky, Peter K., alexanderpas, joshdick, user8288 Jul 5 '10 at 22:12

This question does not relate to the topic of the proposal.
It was closed as part of an automated migration of off-topic to close votes on September 29, 2011.

Substitute "college grad" for "beginner" and "quant. finance" for "investing" and you'd have an ontopic question... – Michael Pryor Jun 1 '10 at 18:48