to benchmark is to compare like with like re: expenditure etc. Having made comparisons you would set an ideal limit, and in this context...the benchmarked amount/state/expenditure has been hit/attained/reached

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 08:51:02 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

In April the benchmark could be so clearly beaten/exceeded/attained/reached

As it is a \'negative Wette\' or bet, that is at stake here, it is safe to assume that the \'benchmark\' is a falling market average of some sort. Without greater context, I offer the above as a possible rendering.

'In April the benchmark could be easily adjusted downward.'

or

'In April the benchmark could be adjusted downward significantly.'

for the sentence

'Im April konnte die Benchmark so deutlich geschlagen werden.'

As benchmark is an English loanword in German, please feel free to use it interchangeably in a market context.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 09:14:38 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Note to Darien:

As I stated above, without further context it is difficult to know what benchmark is being used. Statistical indices are calculated measures subject to human manipulation. They do not just occur. Thus, it is common to use the passive voice, even when the adjustment is automatic.

Good performance when one is betting on a declining market is further decline. If you are in need of still further explanation, then I recommend a refresher course on \'selling short\'.

Finally, who knows you may be completely right, but without greater context neither you nor I can be certain, and your adamancy is suspect.

It is not I who requires further explanation, it is you.


--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 09:18:49 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

One further comment:

I would hope that the asker checks the credentials of the respondents before making a selection and passing false information on their clients. ProZ should not be a popularity contest for those who obtain the greatest number of blue lights.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 10:23:35 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

In my above remark the word \'passive\' should have read \'active\'.

Comment to Ralf Lemster:

Yes, in the sense that the benchmark has moved downward the market can be outperformed. This does not disqualify my entry, however.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 2002-05-18 10:27:04 (GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

A further note to Ralf:

Although the term \'outperform\' is correct here, it is not correct for the reason that Darien offered. This was my reason for objecting to his entry and the motivation for entering my own.

Once again I do not disagree with your own explanation, but do encourage you to reread my own entry with the correction that I have made.

I believe Darien's answer is correct. The "negative bet" refers to a short position, while the *benchmark* is the yardstick against which the performance (hence: "outperform") of the portfolio is measured; for equity portfolios, this is usually an index, or a combination of multiple indices.

The very concept of benchmarking would negate the suggestion that the benchmark itself was *adjusted* downward - that said, the benchmark can indeed move downwards, in which case "outperformance" means losing less, or even gaining.

Im April konnte die Benchmark so deutlich geschlagen werden._>
In April the benchmark was clearly beaten.