mumukada Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > sigh. am never going to pass… Yes you will mumu. Yes you will.
19.25% yup, been there. 26.5% yup had that too. Ahhhh, ok, no there it is, 28.99% That was beyond annoying. Anyway the p90x bookworm has it again. … they use mdietz within each month, and then geometrically link the returns. the explanation left out the requirement of monthly valuations and that that is why you geometrically link months as opposed to just calc-ing the quarterly mod dietz like those tricky bastards asked. Anyway, I just wasted 30 minutes and a perfectly good stapler.
pwned.
I got A.
I wonder if they will pull crap like that on the exam. I actually caught this on another schweser example (i think it was a concept checker).
You only have to see that once and you never get it wrong again. And next time it will take 40 seconds to plug through it. So I hope it is on the exam. It is pretty easy to remember how stupid it was to attempt to calc a qtrly return using mod dietz instead of calc-ing each month and then linking them. Anyway, I am not up on my world of warcraft lingo but yes my stapler got owned. as did the face of the file cabinet it smashed off of.
How would you have calculated it if it was 2004 with the same values? How about 2011?
…maybe that is the genius of qbank. its simple goal is to throw all that stuff out there and piss me off so much that I have to actually learn. the more anger it can illicit the more I will recall. I imagine 2004 was that drawn out headache of quarterly modified dietz math I was attempting. And 2011 is to chain link returns using valuation on the date of CF’s. I made an attempt at the post 2010, since that is pretty straightforward, hoping it would help me guess at this but that didn’t scream A.
Date of portfolio valuation is monthly until 2010. So that’s why you are valuing on a monthly basis and calculating return on a quarterly basis, since you wont have to calc return monthly until 2010 (at which time you have to calc value as of each CF) That’s the way I look at it.
slouiscar Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > …maybe that is the genius of qbank. its simple > goal is to throw all that stuff out there and piss > me off so much that I have to actually learn. the > more anger it can illicit the more I will recall. > > I imagine 2004 was that drawn out headache of > quarterly modified dietz math I was attempting. > And 2011 is to chain link returns using valuation > on the date of CF’s. I made an attempt at the > post 2010, since that is pretty straightforward, > hoping it would help me guess at this but that > didn’t scream A. won’t 2004 use Original Dietz Method of assuming cash flows occuring in the middle of the month? and then link them together…?
Would you have to use the MDietz though if the time periods weren’t broken out in even months?
Nevermind, dumb question.
I think you can use modified dietz until 2010?? Then you cant time weight returns I think
it’s still TWRR…it’s just on the date of all large external cash flows…
Ahh. Ok.
friggin’ Dietz. i hate this SS. hate it. GIPS is hands down my worst topic area, just because i haven’t done a lot of work on it. i promise by exam time, this stuff will be down cold. i want to ace ethics, GIPs, and IPS. that’s almost half the exam before the fun stuff comes in.