In this individual assignment, you will participate in an investment game project (please ensure you have registered). Create a portfolio comprising of individual securi
FNCE 625 – Investment Analysis and Management
Individual assignment - Investment game project
Introduction:
In this individual assignment, you will participate in an investment game project (please ensure you have registered).
Create a portfolio comprising of individual securities (you are allowed to trade in any security available on the online platform, this includes ETFs, etc).
You are expected to explain the rationale behind each security selection (rationale for including the security and a quick view on valuation). You are also expected to explain why the portfolio you have constructed using these securities is a robust, well constructed, efficient portfolio in line with the discussion on the subject in class.
Use data, and analysis to support your explanation.
Deliverables: PowerPoint slide presentation (12 slides max) including portfolio with relevant risk-return metrics. In-class presentation (5 mins max).
Weight: 25% (see rubric for more details)
Your written report should be structured with the following sections:
- Introduction
- Rationale for each security added to the portfolio
- Summary of Portfolio including portfolio assessment
- Conclusion
Submission:
- The report should be in PowerPoint format and not exceed 12 slides.
- Most students will be selected to present in-class, some will have to submit a recording of their presentation (I will provide details for the recording)
- The time limit is 5 minutes and applies to both those selected for an in-class presentation, and those selected to pre-record their presentation!
- There will be grade penalties for exceeding the allotted time!
- The PowerPoint presentation should be submitted before the class in which the individual presentations will take place as per the course outline.
Link for Registeration stock market game(investment game project):https://app.howthemarketworks.com/register/309694
RUBRICS and Syllabus as attached below.
Ind. Assignment – Case
| UCW Master's Level Grading Rubric For Assessment | ||||||||||
| Student Name | Course | |||||||||
| Total Grade | 0% | |||||||||
| 1-4 Scale | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||||||
| Percentage Score | 0-59 | 60-67 | 68-71 | 72-75 | 76-79 | 80-84 | 85-89 | 90-100 | ||
| Grades | F | C | B- | B | B+ | A- | A | A+ | ||
| Mastery Level | Weight | Student Score | Beginning | Developing | Competent | Mastery | ||||
| Standard Level | Below Standard | Approaching Standard | At Standard | Exceeds Standard | ||||||
| Subject Matter | ||||||||||
| Answering questions and results of research | 60 | Key elements are not adequately covered. Content is not comprehensive, has inaccuracies and is not persuasive. Displays lack of understanding of relevant theory. Points not adequately supported by references. Research is lacking in content and quality | Key elements are mostly covered. Content is mostly accurate but lacks persuasivness. Displays some understanding of relevant theory. Points mostly supported by references. Research is lacking in content and quality | Key elements are adequately covered. Content is accurate and persuasive. Displays adequate understanding of relevant theory. Points supported by references. Research is adequate in content and quality | Key elements are completely covered. Content is comprehensive, accurate and persuasive. Displays superior understanding of relevant theory. Points fully supported by specific references. Research is superior in content and quality | |||||
| Organization & Critical Thinking | ||||||||||
| Demonstration of thought process and analysis of problem and resolution using own thoughts and ideas | 20 | Introduction provides poor level of background of paper Structure of paper is not clear and is difficult to follow train of thought process Conclusion does not follow logically from body of paper Critical Thinking is lacking: missing logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | Introduction provides background of paper missing some key elements Structure of paper is not clear and it is not easy to follow train of thought process Conclusion follows from body of paper but misses key points Critical Thinking is not fully present: missing key points of logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | Introduction provides good level of background of paper Structure of paper is clear and train of thought process is understandable Conclusion mostly follows logically from body of paper Critical Thinking is present: logical argumentation & reasoning shows, reasonable examples & valid inferences are made | Introduction provides superior level of background of paper Structure of paper is very clear and easy to follow train of thought process Conclusion follows logically from body of paper Critical Thinking is present through: logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | |||||
| Style & Mechanics | ||||||||||
| APA Application of the requirements of the 7th APA manual to create a standardized formatted report | 5 | 7th Ed. APA Manual is not followed or there are significant errors in: title page & references pages. In-text citations, paraphrasing and direct quotes are quite inadequate but do not rise to the level of plagiarism | 7th Ed. APA Manual is followed with significant errors in: title page & references pages. In-text citations, paraphrasing and direct quotes are lacking but do not rise to the level of plagiarism | 7th Ed. APA Manual is followed with minor errors in: formatted title page, formatted references pages, in-text citations, paraphrasing and direct quotes are adequately used in the correct context | 7th Ed. APA Manual is followed with no errors including: properly formatted title page, properly formatted references pages, in-text citations are correclty used, paraphrasing and direct quotes are properly used in the correct context | |||||
| Grammar/Punctuation/Spelling Use of proper English language grammar, spelling and punctuation to create a readable paper. | 5 | Grammar and sentence structure has major problems following standard English rules and reads with difficulty with major errors in punctuation and spelling | Grammar and sentence structure has problems following standard English rules and reads with some difficulty with errors in punctuation and spelling | Grammar and sentence structure mostly follows standard English rules and reads reasonably well with few errors in punctuation and spelling | Grammar and sentence structure follows standard English rules and reads well with excellent punctuation and spelling | |||||
| Readability & Style Clarity of thought and appropropriate level of language use that brings the author's thoughts and ideas to the reader. | 10 | Sentences are lacking in completeness, clearness, consicseness and are not well-structured. Transitions do not maintain flow of thought. Words are ambiguous. Tone is inappropriate to audience/assessment. Colloquial language or inappropriatel use of paraphrasing is used. | Sentences need to be more complete, clear, consicse and well-constructed. Transitions do not maintain flow of thought well. Words are not precise and have some ambiguity. Tone is not appropriate to audience/assessment. Colloquial language or inappropriatel use of paraphrasing is used too much. | Sentences are mostly complete, clear, consicse and well-constructed. Transitions moslty maintain flow of thought. Words are mostly precise with little ambiguity. Tone is mostly appropriate to audience/assessment. Colloquial language or inappropriatel use of paraphrasing is used sparingly. | Sentences are consistently complete, clear, consicse and well-constructed with strong, varied structure. Transitions consistently maintain flow of thought. Words are quite precise and unambiguous. Tone is comlpetely appropriate to audience/assessment. No colloquial language or inappropriatel use of paraphrasing used. | |||||
| Marks | 100 | – 0 | Additional Comments |
Ind. Assignment – Inv Game
| UCW Masters Level Grading Rubric For Assessment of Presentation | ||||||||||
| Student Name | Course | |||||||||
| Total Grade | 0% | |||||||||
| 1-4 Scale | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||||||
| Percentage Score | Weight | Student Score | 0-59 | 60-67 | 68-71 | 72-75 | 76-79 | 80-84 | 85-89 | 90-100 |
| Grades | F | C | B- | B | B+ | A- | A | A+ | ||
| Mastery Level | Beginning | Developing | Competent | Mastery | ||||||
| Standard Level | Below Standard | Approaching Standard | At Standard | Exceeds Standard | ||||||
| Answering questions and results of research | 50 | Demonstrates poor evaluation and analysis of subject | Demonstrates inadequate evaluation and analysis of subject | Demonstrates adequate evaluation and analysis of subject | Demonstrates thorough evaluation and analysis of subject | |||||
| Eloquence (Oral Communication) | 5 | Demonstrates poor level of eloquence in oral presentation | Demonstrates inadequate level of eloquence in oral presentation | Demonstrates adequate level of eloquence in oral presentation | Demonstrates superior level of eloquence in oral presentation | |||||
| Body Language (Nonverbal communication) | 5 | Demonstrates poor level of nonverbal communication during presentation | Demonstrates inadequte level of nonverbal communication during presentation | Demonstrates adequate level of nonverbal communication during presentation | Demonstrates superior level of nonverbal communication during presentation | |||||
| Presentation Aids (PowerPoint, video, poster, handouts) | 5 | Presentation aids are inappropriate, adding little or no context and understanding to the presentation | Presentation aids are not fully appropriate, adding some context and understanding to the presentation | Presentation aids are appropriate, adding good context and understanding to the presentation | Presentation aids are fully appropriate, adding context and understanding to the presentation | |||||
| Time Management | 5 | Demonstrates poor level of time management in presentation | Demonstrates inadequate level of time management in presentation | Demonstrates adequate level of time management in presentation | Demonstrates superior level of time management in presentation | |||||
| Organization & Critical Thinking | ||||||||||
| Demonstration of thought process and analysis of problem and resolution using own thoughts and ideas | 30 | Critical Thinking is lacking: missing logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | Critical Thinking is not fully present: missing key points of logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | Critical Thinking is present: logical argumentation & reasoning shows, reasonable examples & valid inferences are made | Critical Thinking is present through: logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | |||||
| Marks | 100 | – 0 | Additional Comments |
Group Assignment
| UCW Masters Level Grading Rubric For Assessment of Presentation | ||||||||||
| Student Name | Course | |||||||||
| Total Grade | 0% | |||||||||
| 1-4 Scale | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||||||
| Percentage Score | Weight | Student Score | 0-59 | 60-67 | 68-71 | 72-75 | 76-79 | 80-84 | 85-89 | 90-100 |
| Grades | F | C | B- | B | B+ | A- | A | A+ | ||
| Mastery Level | Beginning | Developing | Competent | Mastery | ||||||
| Standard Level | Below Standard | Approaching Standard | At Standard | Exceeds Standard | ||||||
| Answering questions and results of research | 45 | Demonstrates poor evaluation and analysis of subject | Demonstrates inadequate evaluation and analysis of subject | Demonstrates adequate evaluation and analysis of subject | Demonstrates thorough evaluation and analysis of subject | |||||
| Eloquence (Oral Communication) | 5 | Demonstrates poor level of eloquence in oral presentation | Demonstrates inadequate level of eloquence in oral presentation | Demonstrates adequate level of eloquence in oral presentation | Demonstrates superior level of eloquence in oral presentation | |||||
| Body Language (Nonverbal communication) | 5 | Demonstrates poor level of nonverbal communication during presentation | Demonstrates inadequte level of nonverbal communication during presentation | Demonstrates adequate level of nonverbal communication during presentation | Demonstrates superior level of nonverbal communication during presentation | |||||
| Presentation Aids (PowerPoint, video, poster, handouts) | 5 | Presentation aids are inappropriate, adding little or no context and understanding to the presentation | Presentation aids are not fully appropriate, adding some context and understanding to the presentation | Presentation aids are appropriate, adding good context and understanding to the presentation | Presentation aids are fully appropriate, adding context and understanding to the presentation | |||||
| Time Management | 5 | Demonstrates poor level of time management in presentation | Demonstrates inadequate level of time management in presentation | Demonstrates adequate level of time management in presentation | Demonstrates superior level of time management in presentation | |||||
| Q/A Session, Audience awareness | 5 | Demonstrates poor level of understanding and background in answering questions, reading audience interest level and acting accordingly | Demonstrates inadequate level of understanding and background in answering questions, reading audience interest level and acting accordingly | Demonstrates adequate level of understanding and background in answering questions, reading audience interest level and acting accordingly | Demonstrates superior level of understanding and background in answering questions, reading audience interest level and acting accordingly | |||||
| Organization & Critical Thinking | ||||||||||
| Demonstration of thought process and analysis of problem and resolution using own thoughts and ideas | 30 | Critical Thinking is lacking: missing logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | Critical Thinking is not fully present: missing key points of logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | Critical Thinking is present: logical argumentation & reasoning shows, reasonable examples & valid inferences are made | Critical Thinking is present through: logical argumentation & reasoning, concrete examples & valid inferences | |||||
| Marks | 100 | – 0 | Additional Comments |
Discussion Forum
| UCW Masters Level Grading Rubric For Assessment of Presentation | ||||||||||
| Student Name | Course | |||||||||
| Total Grade | 0% | |||||||||
| 1-4 Scale | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||||||
| Percentage Score | Weight | Student Score | 0-59 | 60-67 | 68-71 | 72-75 | 76-79 | 80-84 | 85-89 | 90-100 |
| Grades | F | C | B- | B | B+ | A- | A | A+ | ||
| Mastery Level | Beginning | Developing | Competent | Mastery | ||||||
| Standard Level | Below Standard | Approaching Standard | At Standard | Exceeds Standard | ||||||
| Participation in the discussion | 100 | |||||||||
| Marks | 100 | – 0 | All valid discussion forum posts will get 100%. |
Masters – CaseStudy
| UCW Masters Level Grading Rubric For Assessment Of Case Study | ||||||||||
| Student Name | Course | |||||||||
| Total Grade | 0 | |||||||||
| 1-4 Scale | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | ||||||
| Percentage Score | Weight | Student Score | 0-59 | 60-67 | 78-81 | 82-84 | 85-89 | 88-91 | 92-100 | |
| Grades | F | D | C |
