KudoZ home » English to German » Investment / Securities

Sentence

German translation: yes, you are right...

Advertisement

Login or register (free and only takes a few minutes) to participate in this question.

You will also have access to many other tools and opportunities designed for those who have language-related jobs
(or are passionate about them). Participation is free and the site has a strict confidentiality policy.
02:27 Jan 23, 2002
English to German translations [PRO]
Bus/Financial - Investment / Securities / Asset management
English term or phrase: Sentence
I'm not sure whether I'm reading this sentence correctly:

In 2001, the XYZ product underperformed the MSCI Europe by 6.4% (performance figures of the XYZ Model Portfolio). Most of the underperformance (5.5%) related to a negative selection effect. About 1% underperformance related to a negative weighting effect. The underperformance was heavily skewed towards the fourth quarter of the year.

Now, I reckon that % is correctly used only in the first instance and that 5.5% and 1% should read percentage points (Prozentpunkte) and not percent.

Is my interpretation correct, and if not, why not ... ;-) ... TIA
Beate Lutzebaeck
New Zealand
Local time: 04:18
German translation:yes, you are right...
Explanation:
... as the sentence basically says that
- if there would not have been a negative weighting effect, the underperformance would be 5.5% and
- if there would have been no "negative selection" (i.e. the portfolio selected would have performed in line with the MSCI Europe index - or would have been identical with it), the underperformance would be about 1% (in the latter case clearly nil).
HTH

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-01-23 21:43:59 (GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------

Hey, don\'t worry about the %/bp problem: you can simply use the %, because it is a percent: say, weighting is \"a\"% and selection is \"b\"% and the two together equal \"a+b\"%. That\'s it! If there would be a case where some \"c\" factor would have diminished the negative effects of these two, we might talk about percentage points, but even then, not necessarily. I hope I could formulate it sufficiently clearly, if not, come again: the thing I like most about ProZ.com is that you are not left alone with your problems.
Selected response from:

Eva Blanar
Hungary
Local time: 16:18
Grading comment
Thanks to both of you -
as neither of you referred to the (perceived) problem of
expressing a portion of a percentage again as a percentage
and not in percentage points, I obviously didn't make my
question perfectly clear. Never mind, that's my problem ... ;-)
2 KudoZ points were awarded for this answer

Advertisement


Summary of answers provided
4 +2yes, you are right...
Eva Blanar
4 +1percentJulia Neyer


  

Answers


20 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +2
yes, you are right...


Explanation:
... as the sentence basically says that
- if there would not have been a negative weighting effect, the underperformance would be 5.5% and
- if there would have been no "negative selection" (i.e. the portfolio selected would have performed in line with the MSCI Europe index - or would have been identical with it), the underperformance would be about 1% (in the latter case clearly nil).
HTH

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-01-23 21:43:59 (GMT) Post-grading
--------------------------------------------------

Hey, don\'t worry about the %/bp problem: you can simply use the %, because it is a percent: say, weighting is \"a\"% and selection is \"b\"% and the two together equal \"a+b\"%. That\'s it! If there would be a case where some \"c\" factor would have diminished the negative effects of these two, we might talk about percentage points, but even then, not necessarily. I hope I could formulate it sufficiently clearly, if not, come again: the thing I like most about ProZ.com is that you are not left alone with your problems.

Eva Blanar
Hungary
Local time: 16:18
Specializes in field
Native speaker of: Hungarian
PRO pts in category: 21
Grading comment
Thanks to both of you -
as neither of you referred to the (perceived) problem of
expressing a portion of a percentage again as a percentage
and not in percentage points, I obviously didn't make my
question perfectly clear. Never mind, that's my problem ... ;-)

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Ralf Lemster: Spot on.
6 hrs
  -> Thanks, this is very flattering from an expert!

agree  Susan Starling
10 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)

24 mins   confidence: Answerer confidence 4/5Answerer confidence 4/5 peer agreement (net): +1
percent


Explanation:
as I am studying for my series 6 exam right now, it is my understanding that only bond price changes are quoted in points, e.g. one point is 1% of $1,000 (or $10) and 1/4 point = $2.50. Therefore, if this sentence was referring to points, there would be no % added after the number. This sentence seems to be rather explaining the two aspects for the total accumulation of a 6.4% underperformance. Hope this helps!

Julia Neyer
Local time: 10:18
Native speaker of: Native in GermanGerman

Peer comments on this answer (and responses from the answerer)
agree  Eva Blanar: One small comment: in addition to fixed income, points approach is often used in macro issues (e.g. inflation).
14 hrs
Login to enter a peer comment (or grade)




Return to KudoZ list


KudoZ™ translation help
The KudoZ network provides a framework for translators and others to assist each other with translations or explanations of terms and short phrases.



See also:



Term search
  • All of ProZ.com
  • Term search
  • Jobs
  • Forums
  • Multiple search