It's the kind of overweight measured in percentage points, not pounds. That's because I'm writing performance reports for institutional mutual funds that may overweight or underweight sectors relative to the funds' benchmarks.
I haven't found any guidelines about how to write about these statistics, so I'd like to find out which wording you prefer for talking about a fund that has above-benchmark holdings in a sector.
- Our overweight in
- Our overweight position in
- Our overweight to
- Our overweighting in
- Our overweighting to
If you can give a compelling reason why you favor specific wording, I'd also like to hear about that.
____________________
Susan B. Weiner, CFA
Check out my website at www.InvestmentWriting.com or sign up for my free monthly e-newsletter.
Copyright 2010 by Susan B. Weiner All rights reserved
Funny, whenever someone writes about weight, this reminds me of my waste. Yeah, I'm over weight and need to wear +size clothings. Why not state: Our active postive position. "to / in", that's up to you. I can't distinguish the differences (English is my 4th language and the first three are Chinese. Ha, ha).
ReplyDeleteSorry, I meant "Waist". English is so diffcult.
ReplyDeleteThank you for taking the time to comment! I imagine that most readers of investment performance commentary won't notice whether you use "to" or "in."
ReplyDeleteI think you might be right abotu this (I'm borrible with grammars). Just dont' touch onto theories, because I had noticed people (espeically statisticians and PHDs) liek to comment (more liek tear up people's opinions) if you write somethign incorrect. I'm sure yo uknow that.
ReplyDeleteIf someone ask you to write something from an attribution report, just be careful when explaining the results at security level. The excess returns using BF or BHB models to explain at security level are incorrect. Yeah, go to your friend Dave's Blog. He had something written on this topic. Sorry, never read those articles on that blog. They're not free and I'm too cheap to buy them.