Last year 154 participants answered 20 demanding propositions put to them as if they were an Investment Analyst / Economist in the Wealth Management Investment Competition. Overall the profession did ok, although had a relatively modest 56% hit rate. Some did very well – six had 75% hit rates – while others have much explaining to do!

The following table shows the propositions, initial level from a year ago and the closing level. If you had answered ‘No’ to every proposition you would have done quite well, with a score of 25.2.

The correct answer was ‘No’ for 15 of the 20 propositions. Unlike last year, there was no significant correlation between the results and the degree of ‘bearish’ / ‘bullish’ responses.

It was a year for the stock pickers.

Scaling factors

The table below shows survey results and the corresponding scaling factors for each proposition.

Top 5 ranking participants

Each participant started with 20 points. Applying the scaling factors to the responses of each participant gives a final score. The top score was 28.65. The bottom score was 7.34. The median score was 20.14.

The following table shows the top 5 participants in the competition.

Richard Cornwell, Charles Pollack and Ting Chen each got 15 propositions correct.

Kim Cossart had just 12 correct, but that included some big payouts including that the oil price would be over US\$55, Japanese 1st quarter GDP would be negative, and that the RBA would not lift interest rates.

Our winner, Zhou Quan got 14 correct. Zhou picked that the Melbourne Autumn auction clearance rates would be below 70%, the Aussie 10-year bond yield would stay below 2.75%, the AUD would fall to below 75 cents, together with the high payout surprises of a drop in Japanese GDP and a strong oil price.

Well done to our top 5.

 Rank Name Score 1 Zhou Quan 28.65 2 Richard Cornwell 28.55 3 Charles Pollack 28.16 4 Kim Cossart 27.17 5 Ting Chen 27.05

The person who responded ‘unsure’ to all twenty propositions finished on 20 points!

A special mention to last year’s runner-up, Stephen Woods. He missed the entry date for the competition, but sent me his responses in early November ‘just for fun’. He got 18 correct with a score of 33.8. It never pays to be late!

CPD: Actuaries Institute Members can claim two CPD points for every hour of reading articles on Actuaries Digital.

Previous

Next