During Michaelmas Term you are required to construct and monitor a portfolio of assets using the StockTrak software. You will have at its disposal $1 million and should include a minimum of 25 assets (for the purposes of this exercise I would suggest mainly equities).
Once registered you can begin trading and constructing your portfolio. Any trading should be executed with the agreement of the rest of your group.
You are required to submit a report on your portfolio at the end of term (see details below). The report should cover issues such as:
- The objective of the portfolio and the approach to investing that underpins it.
- The method and rationale for choosing the particular assets that comprise the portfolio (it would be useful to keep some notes at the time of trading to help you with this).
- Consideration of the risk associated with the assets and the portfolio as a whole.
- The performance of the portfolio during the period in which it is active (you might consider the choice of an appropriate benchmark to compare it with).
MARKING GUIDELINES
Performance in the summative assessment for this module is judged against the following criteria:
- Relevance to question(s)
- Organisation, structure and presentation
- Depth of understanding
- Analysis and discussion
- Use of sources and referencing
- Overall conclusions
GRADING CRITERIA
Grade Descriptors for Undergraduate Summative and Formative Assessment
| Class | Mark(%) | Descriptor |
| First | 86-100 | Exemplary. Exceptional work showing insight into the topic; reflects a complete grasp of knowledge and understanding. Such work is only rarely encountered. |
| 76-85 | Outstanding. Comprehensive knowledge of the topic, showing depth of understanding with evidence of judgement in selection and critical analysis of relevant material. Logically structured and clearly written. | |
| 70-75 | Excellent. Detailed knowledge of the topic, with evidence of judgement in selection and critical analysis of relevant material. Well written with good structure. Minor errors acceptable if compensated by excellence in other areas. | |
| Upper Second | 65-69 | Very Good. Displays good knowledge and thorough understanding of the topic with evidence of broader understanding informed by wider reading. Less critical grasp of the subject than evident in a First Class answer. |
| 60-64 | Good. Reasonably good knowledge and understanding, but little evidence of critical assessment or analysis. Coherent presentation but less well-structured than seen at higher grades. | |
| Lower Second | 55-59 | Adequate. Sound general knowledge of the subject as taught but lacks evidence of broader understanding. Presented in a satisfactory framework with relevance to the topic retained throughout. |
| 50-54 | Fair. Adequate, except that the work may be rather thin or unimaginative, missing some key points or lacking in clarity. | |
| Third | 45-49 | Weak. Exhibits defects such as: factually correct, but at an elementary levelor a narrow selection of material with significant omissionsor significant errors of fact or understandingor muddled; lacking cohesion and direction, or a misguided selection of material. |
| 40-44 | Poor. Typically includes several and sometimes significant defects and is thus barely acceptable. May include very short answers that nevertheless include key points. | |
| Fail | 35-39 | Very poor. A very thin piece of work containing evidence of only rudimentary knowledge of the topic. |
| 30-34 | Extremely poor. The work demonstrates little relevant knowledge and/or understanding of the subject. | |
| 20-29 | Clear fail. Work that misses major elements of the knowledge base. Deserves recognition for making an effort to answer the question or address the essay title, but shows very little evidence of knowledge or understanding. | |
| 10-19 | Serious fail. Significant inability to engage with the question or essay title. Marks are awarded within this range for overall presentation, the odd relevant word in context but negligible evidence of knowledge or understanding. | |
| 0-9 | Outright fail. Work of very little or no value, or disqualified due to lateness, plagiarism or other disciplinary offences. |