Moscyn
Full time employment: Posting here.
- Joined
- Mar 14, 2009
- Messages
- 728
Just to share a recent experience - I was recently reminded by my bank (whilst this bank is in Hong Kong, it is a large global bank listed in various stock exchanges) to refresh my risk profile assessment as an investor. I normally do not bother but since I was in the bank anyways, I was just curious whether they have upgraded their test since the financial turmoil.....it appears they have changed and added more questions in their assessment. The rank results are something like (not exactly as I've forgotten) - "no risk", "cautious", "average", "reasonable risk" and "adventurous". I told them I did not agree to one of the questions which asked whether I have an emergency fund and if so, how many months. Before I answered this question, I had a risk profile of average but when I gave an answer of 9 months or more in emergency fund, the assessment raises my risk profile to adventurous. When I chose 6 months of emergency fund, it classified me to reasonable risk taker. My view is that emergency fund is a basic requirement before one enters into the realm of investing and thus should not be included as a factor to assess risk profile of an investor. Being a cautious person, I indicated in the assessment profile that I do not agree with the assessment - just in case I get many calls trying to sell me some sophisticated high risk products. Can't be too careful these days.... Oh, the bank said that they will feedback my comment to their management.