Resultat av: Portfolio Theory and Risk Management, SF2942, vt 2017Status: Avslutad
Publicerad under: 2017-10-06 - 2017-10-23
Antal svar: 18
Procent av kursdeltagarna som svarat: 18%
Kontaktperson: Anja Janssen
Please indicate your reason(s) for taking this course (check all that apply).18 svarande
(på denna fråga var det möjligt att välja flera svarsalternativ)
|Requirement for concentration||6|| 33%|
|Elective within a concentration||5|| 27%|
|Elective outside concentration||3|| 16%|
|Interest in topic||10|| 55%|
Please indicate how often you attended class.18 svarande
|Less than half of the time||2|| 11%|
Please indicate the number of hours per week you spent on this course outside of class.18 svarande
Please indicate your evaluation of the quality of the course overall.18 svarande
|very good||8|| 44%|
|very bad||0|| 0%|
Please elaborate on your responses above, or on anything else you wish to discuss about the course design and content.- Maybe the course content is not too exciting, bit I feel tha Anja did a good job with the material anyway.
- I find the course very interesting. I think the balance between lessons and problem sessions is good. Moreover, the examples treated during the lessons are good, and we could go further by reading more examples in the book if we want.
- The hours I have spent on the course outside of class have varied a lot, so it's hard to estimate an average. I wish I could have spent more time studying on my own but unfortunately I haven't had time due to other courses. I will spend a lot of time during following weeks to prepare for the exam.
- Very good lectures. Nice balance of theory and examples.
Good exercises. Pace could have been a bit higher.
Relevant assignments. Especially the second one, although a lot of time was spent on understanding the software.
- It should be better structured. The most important results should be better highlighted.
- The course doesn't need too much time. Bonus points are a really nice gift to the students.
- Maybe state more clearly which exercises in the book that are recommended to do before the exam.
- Interesting topics covered in the course! However a bit too theoretical. Not sure how to implement everything. This could be done with better and more clear solutions to the book.
- maybe its just me, but sometimes its hard to see the bigger picture and apply things to real World event. But resonable that is things to read on the side
- I like the design and content of the course a lot, one of the best. Precise and relevant info. Very good.
- Very good lecturer, very open for questions by students, however the used book lacks any kind of structure and therefore leaves me questioning what is the overall motivation for this course. Many areas are covered but none thoroughly, a lot of jumping which makes it hard to follow the course
- Good content, teacher and relevant material.
Did the course arouse your interest in the covered topics?18 svarande
|yes, a lot||6|| 33%|
|yes, to some extent||12|| 66%|
- I was very interested by risk management and hedging principles. (yes, a lot)
- I liked that the course has a very practical focus: Solve problems using the math needed.
I enjoyed that the course was balanced between portfolio theory (mean-variance analysis), financial engineering (derivatives, futures), and interesting actuarial examples (hedge risks etc).
It was nice that a lot of the examples in chapter 3 were skipped since they are quite repetitive and not-so-enticing actuarial problems mostly about people dying... (yes, a lot)
- The utility function and the risk part was interesting (yes, a lot)
- The lecturer and assistant discussed most parts of the course from a very applicable perspective (yes, a lot)
- Boring in the begining as majority of the courses, applications of methods were fun. (yes, a lot)
- Utility and VaR. (yes, a lot)
- The methods presented for portfolio management/theory seems old, i.e. not used in the industry today. (yes, to some extent)
- In my opinion, this course is more an economic course with some mathematical argumentation. We focused more on the economical point of view than on the mathematical part f.e. we skip often the proofs and the more extensive mathematical equations. I would be more interested in the mathematical part of Portfolio Theory. However, as this course can also be attended by economic students, I can understand the reason behind it f.e. that we do not discuss how we use the limits with L'Hospital and so on. (yes, to some extent)
- Course in general was interesting. Made me wanna know more and what methods are used in reality. (yes, to some extent)
- The course is a little bit too theoretical in my point of view. (yes, to some extent)
- Interesting with real-life examples. (yes, to some extent)
Please comment on your own learning in this course. What knowledge or skills did the course help you develop?- -
- This course help me to have a better understanding about some hedging and investment principles.
- The discussed examples help for the understanding of the course. Probably, I also learned some new economic views. For the mathematical part, it was more a repetition.
- Basic concepts of financial mathematics and how to apply other skills like optimization to those areas.
- Nice overview of portfolio theory. Nevertheless more practical examples could be nice.
- I feel more confident that I would be able to work within risk management.
- More real world examples made it more clear for me on how investing works etc.
- More formal knowledge in portfolio optimization and risk measures
Please indicate your evaluation of the clarity of lectures.18 svarande
|very good||8|| 44%|
|very bad||0|| 0%|
- The examples treated during the lectures were very helpful to well understand the course. (very good)
- The lectures have been excellent. I have really appreciated the focus on intuition and applications, for example:
Proving a simplified version of the fundamental theorem of asset pricing, trying to give intuition of why conditional expectation is defined the way it is, deriving the optimisation theorems intuitively for low dimensions, relating mathematical content to economic intuition and theory, relating the course to real-world financial problems, etc.
It has been great! (very good)
- Follows the book closely but not too much. (very good)
- Overall it was very good, sometimes it was slightly a bit too fast for me. I also had some issues following some of the proofs, but I realize that it is a necessary part of the course. (very good)
- Very good, one of the best i had so far. One thing was the writing style, kinda hard to follow sometimes. (very good)
- Concepts are well explained but sometimes I found that there was a lack of practical examples. (good)
- My main problem is that we skipped a lot of the book and therefore, it is sometimes difficult to understand the lecture completely. F.e. we skip chapter 2, but it is the most important chapter for every following proof. Moreover, we have a lot of different course materials (slides, the book, the lecture notes and programming slides). I think the intention behind it is good, but it is also a bit confusing when we switch between programming, slides and white/smartboard during the lecture. Moreover, my feeling is that we did a lot, but to detect a structure in the course (which is the same problem with the book) is quite difficult. In my opinion, the course consists more of different discussed examples in a financial context. For me, this course is more a summarize of everything that you can discuss in finance (Arbitrage, Equivalent Measures, Completeness, Pricing, Utility, Maximization Problems, Convex Optimization, Risk Measures...), but to finish the sentence: The main content of the course Portfolio theory is .... seems to me quite difficult. (satisfactory)
- Some of the mathematical calculations (like long proofs) were difficult to follow. (satisfactory)
Was the lecturer motivated?18 svarande
|very motivated||11|| 61%|
|very unmotivated||0|| 0%|
- Anja Jansen is very motivated, she tries to it as best as she can. Moreover, I liked the Pingo quiz. She also encourage to ask questions and she is always well prepared. (very motivated)
- Makes it easy to follow in class (very motivated)
- The lecturer was motivated and interesting although she could still be a little more dynamic (using more powerful gestures and examples). (motivated)
- Good, clear. (motivated)
Was the lecturer helpful in case if you had questions, also outside class?17 svarande
|Yes, very helpful||10|| 58%|
|Yes, helpful||4|| 23%|
|Not helpful||0|| 0%|
|Does not apply||3|| 17%|
- No idea (?)
- Even if she could not answer it directly, she could answer the questions in the next lecture. This was very helpful. (Yes, very helpful)
- Answered mails very quickly. It is appreciated! (Yes, very helpful)
Would you recommend this lecturer to other students?18 svarande
Did the problem sessions help to understand the material?18 svarande
|Problem sessions were very helpful||7|| 38%|
|Problem sessions were helpful||9|| 50%|
|Problem sessions were not that helpful||2|| 11%|
|Problem sessions were confusing||0|| 0%|
- Problem sessions underline the course material. However, in my opinion the teaching assistant explained easy steps very detailly (f.e. that the expectation is linear or how to deal with a variance...) and for the more difficult steps there were no explanation (Why do we do it in this way? What can we assume for the market? Why?). Moreover, he was quite slow so that we often did not finished the exercises that we had to do. I would prefer that he goes faster though the easier exercises and explain the more difficult exercises longer. (Problem sessions were very helpful)
- Many exercises are very long and a bit confusing at first. The exercise sessions provided clarity. (Problem sessions were very helpful)
- Carl is a great assistant! (Problem sessions were very helpful)
- They were helpful because we saw how to solve some exercices but we didn't train to solve exercices. (Problem sessions were helpful)
- Pretty good (Problem sessions were helpful)
- No, as the questions were so long it felt like we only covered small parts of the material. I suggest more problem sessions for next year. (Problem sessions were not that helpful)
- Don't look like training sessions (we just copy what is written on the blackboard) (Problem sessions were not that helpful)
Would you recommend your teaching assistant (Carl) to other students?18 svarande
Do you have comments about the problem sessions?- -
- The problem sessions were very good to illustrate how to use the results from the lectures, on more concrete and precise applications.
- I took this course last year with Carl as a TA, and to be frank I did not like his problem sessions then. However, he has improved a lot, and this year the problem sessions have been terrific, I'm very impressed!
Clear presentation, good intuitive explanations, problems and solutions supplied in PDFs. Great work Carl!
- Pace could have been a bit higher.
- Problem sessions were more example sessions than problem sessions. The students don't solve the problem by themselves. The TA just present the answer of some typical problems. That's not uninteresting but it is also important for the student to have time to try by themselves.
- Too long questions --> too few problem sessions.
- Lack of interactivity with the students (we just copy what is written on the blackboard)
- Good teacher, was pretty easy to follow.
What is your opinion about the use of Canvas for this lecture? How helpful was the provided material and communications through Canvas?18 svarande
|very helpful||8|| 44%|
|not that helpful||1|| 5%|
|confusing / too much information||0|| 0%|
- I am so thankful for the summaries and material on the website! (very helpful)
- This is good to have everything on the same website. (helpful)
- The provided material was sometimes uploaded very late, especially the problem sessions so that there were hardly time to prepare the exercises in advance. However, Anja Janssen spent a lot of time in summarizing the course in Canvas. I think it is very helpful for those who could not attend the course. This also underline the motivation of the teacher. (helpful)
- Really nice to have a course log on Canvas. It gives a detailed plan of the course to the students. (helpful)
- I did not really use canvas. (not that helpful)
Please add any final thoughts you might have about the course.- Anja has been absolutely superb, I only have three points of constructive criticism to offer her:
1) Sometimes expressions from measure theory have slipped through during the lectures: Hopefully most students understand what "almost surely" means, but many probably get confused by "integrate with respect to the Lebesgue measure". I realise the latter example is unintentional, and that it's difficult to remember to avoid these expressions when they're natural to you.
2) I would recommend to switch the linear regression weight-height example to something completely uncontroversial (apartment size and apartment price?) since people can be very sensitive about their physical appearance.
3) I'm not entirely sure if I really think the following is a good idea, but maybe it would be good to just state the formal optimisation theorems in chapter 2 some time since (I believe?) they are referred back to a lot in the book.
- My final thoughts are:
The lecturer is good, but a clear structure in the book and lecture is missing.
- Overall very good course. Could be clearer which parts of the book that will be examined and which will not.
- The use of Pingo is a real good point. It should be used more often.
- Might need more material to prepare for the exam.
- Interesting course, good and prepared lecturer. However not much material to study on your own. The questions in the book are few and quite advanced and the solution manual to it is quite sparse. Also it is not clear what the exam will be like...
- Anna is a great teacher!
- I prefer when the teacher not uses slides at all since it makes it much harder to concentrate, compared to when the blackboard is used.
- Good course and teachers, good luck in next courses!