User talk:Paul.Paquette/Wikipedia

{| border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" align="left" width="100%" style="background-color:transparent;"
 * valign=top|

{| style="background-color:transparent" border="0" cellpadding="10px" cellspacing="10px" align="center" width="100%"
 * bgcolor="#d2e7f7" style="border:solid 1px #aaa;"|
 * bgcolor="#d2e7f7" style="border:solid 1px #aaa;"|

'''Note: I reserve the right to edit and delete irrelevant or obsolete comments/information at my discretion. I do this because I hate clutter & redundant statement, however stuff that I find relevant, and up todate, I will keep. Please keep your comments as thrift as possible, and to the point. Staments of Apology or justification for ones actions will be deleted, I do not want to hear it, all I want to hear is constructive criticism, leave yourself out of the statement. Please read the following tips''' before posting a comment. Paul.Paquette 15:47, 28 December 2005 (UTC)

Asset Allocation Project
Firstly thank you for inviting me to help in your project. I have looked at the Asset Allocation page. My thoughts are these:


 * Also, the "type, market and time horizon" indicators you have chosen are very narrow and specific. This type of data is generally only provided by specialist data providers.  Why not take a more global approach and consider broader markets and different types of sector definitions.  Try IMA sectors and Morningstar Categories for inspiration.  Ask yourself why the US market classifies equities in Japan and Spain in the same "international" equity sector, and almost everywhere else in the world, markets are differetiated into broad geographic devisions at the very least.  The definition of the sector has an enormous effect on the types of data you are seeking and therefore impacts on it's usefulness.

I hope you find this input useful, regards simonthebold 21:59, 5 January 2006 (UTC)