MAJAN UNIVERSITY COLLEGE FACULTY OF BUSINESS MANAGEMENT STUDENT ASSIGNMENT COVER SHEET Module Name and Level Security Analysis & Portfolio Management Module Code FC 33-3 Assessment No. Portfolio Assessment Type & weighting: Individual Report 80% weighting (60% for Report +20% for presentation) STUDENT MCUC NUMBER: Please note that a grade will only be given to those whose student number is noted on this form. Please ensure that the student numbers from all group members are recorded accurately. Submission Date: MODULE TUTOR: Suryanarayana DECLARATION • The work contained in this assignment is my own and that all materials and sources used have been acknowledged. • I/We have not copied or colluded in part or in whole, or otherwise plagiarised the work of other students. • This assignment has not been submitted for previous assessment in any other subject or to a substantial extent has been accepted for the award of any other unit, module, degree or diploma of a university or any other institute, except where due acknowledgement is made in the text. • I/We confirm that I/we have read, understood and followed the guidelines for assignment submission and presentation provided by the lecturer. • I/We understand that this assignment may be retained on the database and used to make comparisons with other assignments in future. • I/We have made a copy of my assignment • This work may be photocopied and/or communicated for the purpose of identifying plagiarism. • I/We give permission for a copy of this marked assignment to be retained by the faculty of Business Management for the purpose of course reviews by external examiners and to be used as a resource by Majan College. • I/We understand that unauthorized late submission without a valid written extension will be marked as per the college policy mentioned in the students handbook page 16 section 4.4. Security Analysis & Portfolio Management Feb - June17 Semester Report 80% weighting (60% for report & 20% for presentation) The Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM) says that the expected return of a security or a portfolio equals the rate on a risk-free security plus a risk premium. If this expected return does not meet or beat the required return, then the investment should not be undertaken. The security market line plots the results of the CAPM for all different risks (betas). Assume that you are a financial analyst offering consultancy services to the investors to invest in Stock Market. You are expected to choose any stock market Index such as MSM-30, Dow Jones 30 Index, and BSE Sensex 30 etc. Apply Capital Asset Pricing Model to the index companies, analyse the results obtained and provide a detailed report with appropriate recommendation on investments to your client. Your report should cover the following: • A brief discussion on the Index chosen for your study. • Review of literature which should not be descriptive, but should be evaluative providing the clarity in the review conducted. It should include the latest and relevant contributions. • Discussion on the aggressive and defensive securities within the chosen index companies based on the results. • Discussion on the securities which are overvalued and undervalued based on the results obtained. • Recommendations for ideal investments to your clients based on the final evaluations and findings. The report should be supported with • The calculation of expected returns for individual securities within the chosen Index on monthly average (based on daily returns) for a period of 3 years. • Calculation of expected returns from the market for the chosen Index on monthly average (based on daily returns) for a period of 3 years. • Calculation of alpha & beta for the individual securities. • Calculate the returns for individual securities based on CAPM • List the securities which are most aggressive and defensive based on the above calculations. • Plot the security market line (SML) • Identify the securities which are overvalued and undervalued based on SML Note: You should use Excel for all the above calculations. However the final results could be presented in form of tables along with explanation for the same in your report. The marking criterion is as follows: Understanding of the concept – 25% Application, Argument & Analysis – 30% Structure – logical flow and completion of task - 10% Information search including the variety of sources used and Referencing -15% Language - 5% Conclusions and Recommendation - 15% In addition to the report, you are expected to give a Power Point Presentation (which carries 20% weighting) on the final report which you have prepared. The Presentation will be evaluated on the following basis. 1. Contents of the PPT- Maximum of 8 to 10 slides 2. Language • Audibility • Accuracy 3. Presentation Skills • Responsiveness to audience • Confidence • Timing 4. Interactions Answering the queries The marking criteria for the Presentation would be as follows: a) Contents and understanding of concepts– 25%. b) Presentation Skills – 25%. c) Confidence and Command over Language – 25% d) Interaction/ Handling Questions from Peers and Tutor – 25%. GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ASSIGNMENT 1) This is an individual assignment and carries a total of 80% (60% fro report +20% for presentation) weighting of the module grade. 2) This assignment follows a report format. 3) Your report should be word processed. The font should be Times New Roman. The font size should be 12 with 1.5 line spacing. 4) You should use excel function for all your calculations. 5) The Assignment Submission link on MOVE will be open, a week ahead of the submission date. 6) You can submit your assignment multiple times, till the submission deadline. Note that Turnitin could take up to 24 hours to produce similarity reports for submissions. 7) Assignments should be submitted by 6 pm on the day of the deadline. There is a grace period until midnight to allow for technical difficulties, but any assignment submitted after this will be considered as a late submission. Technical problems will not be accepted as an excuse for a late submission. 8) The last submission, within the deadline, will be considered as your final submission. 9) The similarity percentage of your final submission will be one of the factors considered, for assessing the originality of your assignment. However, the decision to report an assignment for plagiarism is taken by the Lecturers, who mark your assignment. 10) The Lecturers will consider a number of factors such as Assignment type, part of the assignment where similarity occurs, nature of similarity etc., along with the similarity percentage of your assignment to assess the originality of your assignment. Therefore, similarity percentage would not be accepted as a basis for disputing academic judgments regarding plagiarism. 11) Note that the similarity percentage of your submission can change till the submission deadline, if the submissions of other students have similarity to your assignment. Therefore, the similarity percentages are not final, till the assignment submission is closed. 12) You are expected to attach the front sheet with full details. 13) You are expected to maintain an electronic copy and a paper copy of your assignment. 14) The length of your assignment should be 2500 words (+/- 10%). Please state the exact word count at the end of the assignment. 15) Your report should be well structured, with clear heading, contents page and page numbered. 16) All sources of material should be fully referenced using Harvard Style of referencing. For details of Harvard referencing style refer the student’s hand book, section 7.2 page no.41. 17) Any plagiarized work will be penalized. See the penalties in the student’s handbook section 5.6 page no.30. 18) Unauthorised and late submission without a valid written extension from the module tutor will not be marked and will be awarded a grade G (0) irrespective of the quality of the work. See student’s handbook section 4.4 page 16. 19) The electronic copy should be uploaded in MOVE within the specified date. Additional Guideline 1. The Assignment Submission link on MOVE will be open, a week ahead of the submission date. 2. You can submit your assignment multiple times, till the submission deadline. Note that Turnitin could take upto 24 hours to produce similarity reports for submissions. 3. The last submission, within the deadline, will be considered as your final submission. 4. The similarity percentage of your final submission will be one of the factors considered, for assessing the originality of your assignment. However, the decision to report an assignment for plagiarism is taken by the Lecturers, who mark your assignment. 5. The Lecturers will consider a number of factors such as Assignment type, Part of the assignment where similarity occurs, Nature of similarity etc., alongwith the similarity percentage of your assignment, to assess the originality of your assignment. Therefore, similarity percentage would not be accepted as a basis for disputing academic judgments regarding plagiarism. 6. Note that the similarity percentage of your submission can change till the submission deadline, if the submissions of other students have similarity to your assignment. Therefore, the similarity percentages are not final, till the assignment submission is closed. Marking criteria for the written report. SAPM Assignment Substandard (0 pts ) Poor (40pts) Fair (60pts) Good (80pts) Exceptional(100pts ) Structure: (10%) Logical flow, Cohesion, Completion and focus of task/s The report is unorganized to the point of being virtually unreadable. Lacks cohesion and orderly flow. The assignment has unacceptable failings in structuring and/or clarity of written expression. Tasks are incomplete and unfocussed. Incomplete in all respects; does not reflect any requirements The report is unorganized, but can be read. Poor flow of the report structure. The assignment has failings in structuring and/or clarity of written expression, which impair its capacity to communicate. All the tasks lack proper focus in discussion. Incomplete in most respects; barely reflects requirements The report is somewhat organized. The flow is not coherent and needs improvement. While the assignment has some failings in structuring and/or clarity of written expression, these do not impair its capacity to communicate. All the tasks are addressed and discussed but one/two lack focus/clarity. Incomplete in many respects; reflects few requirements The report is fairly well organized. There is order, cohesion and coherence, but there is still scope for improvement. A generally well- structured assignment, which manages clear communication of ideas. All the tasks are addressed and discussed with the required focus Complete in most respects; reflects most requirements. The report is very well organized with a cohesive discussion lending coherence to the content. The structure is exemplary. An assignment with excellent clarity of expression which significantly enhances communication of ideas. All the tasks are discussed astutely with proper focus. Complete in all respects; reflects all requirements fully. Language (5%) The report is difficult to read due to overwhelming errors or misspellings Frequent compositional errors or misspellings, but the report can be read. More than occasional errors or misspellings, but that does not take away significantly from the quality. Well executed. Few grammar or writing errors. Reads easily. Execution is excellent. No grammar or writing errors. Reads easily. Information, Research & Referencing: (15 %) Variety of sources used, relevance of sources used There is no evidence for information search Information search is not adequate. Limited and uncritical use of a restricted range of sources Relevant information search is evident, but not adequate. Use of a range of appropriate sources. Good usage of variety information from various sources. Use of a wide range of appropriate sources with some critical awareness of their status and relevance Excellent compilation of the relevant information from variety of sources. Excellent usage of the information to support the discussion. Use of a wide range of appropriate sources, indicating personal research and with full critical awareness of their status and relevance. Grasp of concepts (25 %): Understanding of relevant concepts Does not show any grasp of the subject matter; demonstrating inadequate understanding of the topic/s and issue/s. Shows a limited grasp of the subject matter demonstrating limited but acceptable understanding of topic/s and issue/s. Shows the required level of grasp of the subject matter demonstrating an average understanding of topic/s and issue/s. Shows a good grasp of the subject matter demonstrating an accomplished understanding of topic/s and issue/s. Shows a comprehensive grasp of the subject matter demonstrating a sophisticated understanding of topic/s and issue/s. Argument/Analysis: (30%) Development of Argument / Analysis , Detailed discussion on the tasks involved, Critical awareness / interpretation Lack of analysis of information. No discussion is evident. The discussed tasks are completely out of focus. Little or no evidence of critical evaluation of material. Poor analysis of information. Although there is evidence for some discussion, they are discrete and lacking focus. It does not reflect critical application of the concepts to the task. Evidence of limited critical evaluation in some areas, with some lost opportunities or misunderstandings The information from various sources although relevant is not properly applied to the task. There is some evidence for critical analysis and reasoning. Evidence of a general critical stance, although some material not evaluated Good application of the information to the task. There is evidence of in-depth analysis of data. But, all the tasks are not consistent in the analytical rigor. The inferences drawn could have been more meaningful. Evidence of good critical appreciation and evaluation of relevant theory and research and a systematic attempt to relate it to the topic Excellent analysis of the information and precise application to the task. Critical reasoning is evident in the discussion of all tasks. Evidence of thorough critical appreciation and evaluation of relevant theory and Research and a systematic and creative attempt to relate it to the topic. Conclusion & Recommendations: (15%) Conclusions are not supported with any reasons or evidence; no evidence of any interpretations Presents hardly any recommendations, realistic, appropriate or otherwise. Conclusions are supported with very weak reasoning and little evidence; Interpretations are one –sided and not objective. Presents recommendations but these not realistic or appropriate and with little, if any, support from the analysis and concepts discussed. Conclusions are supported with limited reasoning and evidence; presents a somewhat one-sided interpretation. Presents recommendations which are somewhat realistic and appropriate but not very specific; there is some support from the analysis and concepts discussed. Conclusions are supported with reasons and evidence; presents a fairly balanced view; interpretation is both reasonable and objective. Presents specific, realistic and appropriate recommendations supported by the analysis and concepts discussed. Conclusions are supported with strong arguments and evidence; presents a fairly balanced and critical view; interpretation is both reasonable and objective. Presents detailed, specific, realistic and appropriate recommendations clearly supported by the analysis and concepts discussed Marking criteria for presentation SAPM Presentation Substandard / poor 0 pts Average 40pts Fair 60pts Good 80pts Excellent 100pts Contents and understanding of concepts (25%) No visual aids are used Slides are not organized logically, Slides do not represent the arguments and there is no synthesis between the two Slides cover the main aspects of the presentation, structured properly and match the arguments There is a clear structure of slides and synthesized There is logical flow of information. Slides complement the arguments The slides are clearly structured and well synthesized There is logical flow of information Slides enhance the arguments Presentation Skills (25%) The discussions are not related to the topic of the study. Does not understand the meaning of research Demonstrates no critical thinking and analytical skills Does not represent the issues holistically and most of the relevant dimensions are not discussed Demonstrates poor critical thinking and analytical skills Discusses the topic in its entirety as all dimension are discussed, fairly synthesized critical thinking and analytical skills are satisfactorily demonstrated Understands the complexity of information but multiple viewpoints are not well synthesized. Demonstrates good critical thinking and analytical skills Presents in-depth information on the chosen topic. Multiple viewpoints are presented and wide variety of sources is cited. Demonstrates excellent critical thinking and analytical skills Confidence and Command over Language (25%) Shows signs of nervousness as both content knowledge and presentation is incorrect, No eye contact Demonstrates poor level of confidence evident from inadequate level of subject knowledge and lack of preparation. No confidence demonstrated through language, expression and body language all of which indicates lack of confidence. No eye contact Demonstrates satisfactory level of confidence evident from adequate level of subject knowledge and preparation. Confidence demonstrated through language, expression and body language seems artificial. rarely keeps eye contact Demonstrates good level of confidence evident from good subject knowledge and preparation. Confidence demonstrated through language, expression and body language. Frequent eye contact Excellent confidence evident from command over subject knowledge, preparation. Confidence demonstrated through language, expression and body language. Maintains continuous eye contact Interaction/ Handling Questions from Peers and Tutor (25%) Makes no effort to either understand the question or respond to the question. Does not understand the questions responds incorrectly, Asks for questions to be repeated, tried to avoid questions Demonstrates an ability to understand the questions only at the surface level, respond with some explanation, focus and reasoning. Demonstrates ability to understand the essence of questions, responds with confidence with clear explanation, focus and reasoning. Demonstrates an excellent ability to understand the essence of questions, responds with confidence with clear explanation, focus and reasoning. Explains beyond what is expected Old grading System (Before Feb 2015) GRADE GRADE POINT DESCRIPTION GENERAL ASSESSMENT CRITERIA A+ 16 Excellent • An outstanding piece of work. • Shows evidence of wider reading and originality • Strongly analytical. All important points are covered. • Arguments should be supported by examples and evidence, objectively presented and evaluated, • Well-structured and well written, without noticeable grammatical or other errors. • Correctly referenced A 15 A- 14 B+ 13 Very Good • Very good work. • All main points will have been covered, though minor issues may have been omitted. • The work will be analytical, balanced and soundly based. • Examples and supporting evidence should have been included. • The writing should be essentially correct, without major grammatical or other errors. • Generally referenced correctly. B 12 B- 11 C+ 10 Good • Generally good work. • Most points will have been covered, but many finer points will generally have been missed. • Shows limited reading. • Arguments/analysis should be basically well structured and balanced with relevant examples, but with errors and gaps. • The writing is clear, but has errors that nevertheless do not obscure the meaning. • Referencing will be present but may at times be inaccurate or insufficient. C 9 C- 8 D+ 7 Pass • Satisfactory. • Shows sufficient grasp of the subject to be acceptable. • Tends to be descriptive. • Examples and evidence is likely to be weak and limited. • Shows limited reading. • Referencing is likely to be absent or very poorly carried out. D 6 D- 5 E 4 Refer • Unsatisfactory/ Compensatable fail. • Serious errors and omissions. • Very little analysis F 2 Fail • Work of a very poor standard with little relevant information and/or serious errors. F- 1 • Work containing little of merit G 0 • No work submitted Old grading System (before Feb 2015) GRADING SLAB GRADE GRADE POINT Range of Marks in % A+ 16 86 to 100 A 15 76 to 85.9 A- 14 70 to 75.9 B+ 13 67 to 69.9 B 12 63 to 66.9 B- 11 60 to 62.9 C+ 10 57 to 59.9 C 9 53 to 56.9 C- 8 50 to 52.9 D+ 7 47 to 49.9 D 6 43 to 46.9 D- 5 40 to 42.9 E 4 35 TO 39.9 F 2 20 TO 34.9 F- 1 0 TO 19.9 G 0 NA New Grading System (Starting Feb. 2015) Grade Letter Mark Band % Grade Descriptor A+ 80-100 Outstanding P A S S • An outstanding piece of work. • Shows evidence of wider reading and originality • Strongly analytical. All important points are covered. • Arguments should be supported by examples and evidence, objectively presented and evaluated, • Well-structured and well written, without noticeable grammatical or other errors. • Correctly referenced A 75-79 Excellent A- 70-74 B+ 67-69 Commendable • Very good work. • All main points will have been covered, though minor issues may have been omitted. • The work will be analytical, balanced and soundly based. • Examples and supporting evidence should have been included. • The writing should be essentially correct, without major grammatical or other errors. • Generally referenced correctly B 64-66 B- 60-63 C+ 57-59 Good • Generally good work. • Most points will have been covered, but many finer points will generally have been missed. • Shows limited reading. • Arguments/analysis should be basically well structured and balanced with relevant examples, but with errors and gaps. • The writing is clear, but has errors that nevertheless do not obscure the meaning. • Referencing will be present but may at times be inaccurate or insufficient. C 54-56 C- 50-53 D+ 47-49 Satisfactory • Satisfactory. • Shows sufficient grasp of the subject to be acceptable. • Tends to be descriptive. • Examples and evidence is likely to be weak and limited. • Shows limited reading. • Referencing is likely to be absent or very poorly carried out. D 44-46 D- 40-43 E 35-39 Marginal Fail F A I L • Unsatisfactory/ Compensatable fail. • Serious errors and omissions. • Very little analysis F 25-34 Fail • Work of a very poor standard with little relevant information and/or serious errors. F- 01-24 Fail • Work containing little of merit G 0 Non-Submission • No work submitted