JP5113083B2 - Decision support platform that supports financial consulting services - Google Patents

Description

(Cross-reference of related applications)
This application and the applicant are in common and are filed on the same date, and have an application number << correction to fill in serial number after serial number is given >> U.S. Patent Application entitled "System and Method Configured to Support Financial Analysis" with application number << Correction to fill in serial number after serial number is given >> Are incorporated into this application for reference.

  The present invention relates generally to financial consulting methodologies, and more particularly to systems and methods configured to support financial consulting services.

  Many financial professionals and investors will agree that in the traditional financial services industry, the loss of investor credit has spread considerably. Situations that cause this credit loss include inadequate advice from financial advisors, incomplete and / or inaccurate information based advice, predatory sales tactics, and corrupt financial institutions. This credit loss situation has led to a decline in the overall market (ie the value of the fund and the number of investors), which not only damages the industry based on commerce and product sales, ie the traditional financial industry. This is a serious damage to the stock market and corporate funding capabilities.

  Product sellers and employed salesmen generally manage product information and restrict access to product information. Sellers generally do not want consumers to have a practical way to objectively evaluate their products against other companies' products. With the ability to objectively compare (ie, objectively evaluate) the products provided, financial products can be effectively commoditized and negatively impacted on large advertising and sales budgets for large-scale product sellers. Will have an impact. As described in Bureau of National Affairs, June 20, 2000, “Financial Planning Journal,” the warning against the risk that industry products such as mutual funds will no longer be traded products is the Investment Company Institute (Investment Company Institute). It was listed as one of the top priorities that members face.

  Traditional financial services industry brokers and other product salesmen continually approach future and current retail investors (ie, consumers) to encourage customers to purchase their own financial products. In general, such brokers and salesmen approach consumers because it is a job, not necessarily because the financial product is needed or requested. They are hired to sell certain institutions' financial products to everyone who can buy them.

  Over the past 15 years, there has been a general trend in the financial services market that refrains from individual advice and guidance for product sales. This is customer-client continuity, where one person (ie the customer side) of continuity is treated as a customer for sale and the other person (ie the client side) is treated as a client for advice. I can imagine that. This tendency to approach the continuity customer side has created increasingly larger cavities on the continuity client side.

  In an environment where the number of financial products continues to increase (eg, more than 13,000 mutual funds, thousands of insurance products), consumers do not have a practical approach to obtaining information on all these options, Even if you can get the information you need, there is no practical approach to compare them (for example, to find out what is best for you). This lack of knowledge is often used by the traditional financial services industry. Consumer confidence advisors (such as agents and certified public accountants) lack sufficient knowledge and information about many of these financial products, so even these confidence advisors often make use of this lack of product knowledge. There is a limit to what can be done to protect clients from being done. As described above, since the amount of information is overwhelming, even if the information can be obtained, there is often a limit as described above.

  Yet another limitation with such legacy financial products and services is that the traditional related processes used to select and recommend money managers are essentially “opaque”. Such processes are not generally disclosed, and usually the trustee of such goods and services requires a description and explanation of the means by which these money managers are selected and / or recommended. do not do. The inherently opaque nature of this process can cause some abuse and limit the means of easily detecting it.

  The vast majority of financial product consumers receive advice specific to investment decisions from trusted advisors such as agents or CPA (Certified Accountants) (that is, those who do not plan to sell the product), and are unique to the traditional financial services industry. You would choose the option of being released from pressure. Therefore, it would be beneficial to have a method and apparatus configured to support financial consulting services through a trusted advisor who is not necessarily a professional in the traditional financial services industry.

  According to one embodiment of the invention, the system issues one or more data processing devices, instructions that can be processed by one or more data processing devices, and instructions that are accessible by one or more data processing devices. Device. The instructions are configured such that one or more data processing devices support the preparation of client specific template information and the determination of client specific consulting information in accordance with the client specific template information. The client specific template information includes performance criteria, weights, prescribed investment data set information, filters configured to refine the investment data set information, and / or process instructions.

  In accordance with another embodiment of the present invention, a system includes one or more data processing devices, instructions that can be processed by one or more data processing devices, and instructions that are accessible by one or more data processing devices. Device. The instructions support one or more data processing devices that accept client background information, prepare client-specific template information according to client background information, and determine client-specific consulting information according to client-specific template information. It is configured.

  In accordance with another embodiment of the present invention, a system includes one or more data processing devices, instructions that can be processed by one or more data processing devices, and instructions that are accessible by one or more data processing devices. Device. The instruction is to determine the client-specific investment option according to the client-specific template information, objective quantification of the investment option according to the client-specific template information, and creation of the objectively quantified investment option. The above data processing device is configured to support. The client specific template information includes performance criteria, weights, prescribed investment data set information, filters configured to refine the investment data set information, and / or process instructions.

  According to another embodiment of the present invention, the system includes means for determining a set of indexes, means for determining an overall investment index performance score in response to information related to the index, and an overall investment index performance. Means for evaluating the investment portfolio in response to information related to the score. Each of the indexes corresponds to each investment in the investment portfolio.

  According to another embodiment of the present invention, the system comprises means for determining a plurality of investment index performance scores and means for determining a plurality of investment index performance scores, each of the investment index performance scores. Corresponds to each investment index, each investment index corresponds to each investment performance score, and further comprises means for evaluating each investment performance score according to information associated with each of the investment index performance scores. Each investment performance score corresponds to each investment in the investment portfolio.

  According to another embodiment of the present invention, a system includes a means for determining an asset class in response to an allocated investment in an investment portfolio, between an allocated investment represented by the asset class and a plurality of unallocated investments. And means for carrying out relative performance evaluation.

  Correspondingly, it is a main object of the present invention to provide a solution that overcomes the limitations and drawbacks associated with conventional approaches for supporting financial services for clients. That is, the method disclosed herein enables support of financial consulting services through a client's confidence advisor, but not necessarily professional in the traditional financial services industry. Further, such a method generates consulting information (such as investment options) that is objectively quantified. Thus, in an embodiment of the method according to the invention, the client can make decisions in an objective and prejudice-free manner.

  Now, looking at a particular embodiment of the present invention, in at least one embodiment of the invention disclosure made herein, the performance criteria includes a parameter that represents the performance of the investment desired by the client.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, the preparation of client-specific template information includes displaying performance criteria quantitatively and / or qualitatively.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, determining client specific consulting information includes forming a hierarchical weighted structure and distributing the weighting to performance factors and class nodes.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, the hierarchical weighted structure includes a plurality of parent class nodes and performance factors and / or child class nodes associated with one or more parent class nodes.

  In at least one embodiment of the invention, the distribution of weights includes assigning relative weights and calculating actual weights in response to information derived from the relative weights.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, each parent class node includes a plurality of performance factors and / or a combination of one or more performance factors and one or more child class nodes.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, the provision of client-specific template information is to output client-specific consulting information, display client-specific consulting information, and / or access to client-specific investment information for the purpose of determining related information. including.

  In at least one embodiment of the invention, determining client-specific consulting information includes determining client-specific investment options according to information derived from performance criteria and creating objectively quantified investment options. Thus, objectively quantifying investment options according to information derived from performance criteria.

  In at least one embodiment of the invention, objective quantification of investment options includes determining a set of indexes and determining an overall investment index performance score in response to information derived from the index.

  In at least one embodiment of the invention, the investment index corresponds to each investment in the investment portfolio.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, objective quantification of investment options includes determining an asset class corresponding to the allocated investment in the investment portfolio, and displaying the allocated investment and the plurality of unallocated in the asset class. And performing relative performance assessments with the investment.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, objective quantification of investment options includes determining a plurality of investment performance scores and determining a plurality of investment index performance scores.

  In at least one embodiment of the invention, each investment performance score corresponds to each investment in the investment portfolio.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, objective quantification of investment options includes determining a total investment performance score based on the investment performance score and a total investment index according to information derived from the investment index performance score. Determining a performance score.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, the determination of client-specific consulting information includes determining an asset class corresponding to an allocated investment in the investment portfolio, an allocated investment displayed in the asset class, and a plurality of unallocated investments. And performing a relative performance evaluation.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, determining client-specific consulting information includes determining a plurality of investment performance scores and determining a plurality of investment index performance scores.

  The above objects, other objects and embodiments of the present invention will become readily apparent upon further study.

  An embodiment of an information flow schematic 100 according to the present invention is shown in FIG. The entities in the information flow schematic include a financial service client 102, a trust advisor 104 (ie, a partner trust advisor), a financial services consultant 106, and a decision support platform 108 (ie, system). Information (such as client background information and / or client-specific consulting information) is communicated between the financial service client 102 and the trusted advisor 104. Similarly, information (such as client background information and / or client-specific consulting information) is communicated between the trusted advisor 104, the financial service consultant 106, and the decision support platform 108.

  In the embodiment of the information flow schematic 100 shown in FIG. 1, the credential advisor 104 is a person / configuration independent of the financial services consultant 106, and the financial services client 102 includes the financial services consultant 106 and the decision support platform 108. It will not be directly involved. In another embodiment (not shown), the credential advisor 104 and the financial service consultant are the same person (eg, agent, CPA, or family member), and the same person is the financial service client 102, the decision support platform. No deep and / or direct involvement with 108. In yet another embodiment (not shown), the credential advisor 104 and the financial services consultant may be another person from a common institution operating for the financial services client 102 (a common local, national or international consulting company). Hired agents and CPA, etc.) and a common institution keeps the financial services client 102 away from deep and / or direct involvement with the decision support platform 108. In yet another embodiment (not shown), the financial service client 102 functions directly as its own credential advisor and financial service consultant so that the financial service client 102 is directly involved with the decision support platform 108.

  Here, the involvement and communication between the financial service client 102, the credential advisor 104 (ie, the affiliated credential advisor), the financial services consultant 106, and / or the decision support platform 108 is performed via a network computer system. Disclose. For example, such involvement and information transfer is supported via a network computer system via the network system 400 shown in FIG. The Internet is an example of such a network computer system. A website may be provided to enable such involvement and information transmission. Specific examples of such involvement and information transmission include information acquisition functions (such as acceptance of background information from clients), service payment functions (electronic reception of payments for services), distributed processing functions (for example, various decision support functions) Are implemented in a distributed manner), consulting information distribution functions (eg, providing client-specific consulting information such as objective quantification investment options and client-specific reports to clients and / or trusted advisors), and the like.

  The decision support platform 108 includes, for example, a client (client life situation, investment preference, financial status, financial target, risk tolerance, etc.), basic decision information (including but not limited to asset allocation techniques and rule sets), Access to and / or information on investment performance information (both for all valid product options and client-specific historical performance information), document format template information to implement relevant decision support functions I will provide a. In one embodiment, information used to perform the decision support functions disclosed herein (eg, manually and / or by a decision support platform) is stored in and accessed from one or more databases. Is possible. Examples of decision support functions that will be described in detail later include inputting, editing, and / or determining information included in a client-specific template and determining client-specific consulting information corresponding at least in part to the basic determination information. (Such as determining client-specific investment options). Examples of such decision basis information include information on prescribed decision implementation rules, information on investment effect selection, client demand for finance, hope, and / or information on the correlation between goals and investment opportunities. Examples of investment performance information include information related to return on investment, information related to investment risk, other performance and structural characteristics of the investment (eg manager tenure, turnover rate, internal fee / cost structure, etc.) Includes information related to editing related information, performance and relative analysis of structural data. Examples of document format information include information relating to the format of the prescribed document, contents contained in the prescribed document, and information relating to investment selection (such as creation of a printed document containing such information and / or display of such information). Contains relevant information. Decision basic information, investment performance information, and document format information are examples of client-specific consulting information for a specific client, and support the decision support function according to the present invention.

  According to at least one embodiment of the invention, the decision support function disclosed herein comprises a first decision engine (such as a rule-based expert system) and a second decision engine (such as an investment selection optimization system). Performed by decision support platform. The first decision engine supports the formation of client-specific templates that represent client-specific profiles with various information (eg, rules, data sets, processing instructions, performance criteria, etc.). Examples of such information contained in the client-specific template include performance weights and factors (eg, parameters corresponding to the investment effect desired by the client), prescribed data and / or data sets, and data set operations (data set Including a logical condition filter and processing instructions for specifying refinement / reduction and the like. The processing instructions represent information that supports tasks such as factors, weights, correct use of filters, as well as supporting document assembly functions (such as automated reporting), and information related to regression analysis / evaluation of investment information. The information contained in the client-specific template is a second decision that supports the scoring and ranking process to optimize investment choices (eg, create investment options) in a way that matches the client's individual demands, goals and preferences Used by the engine. Such instructions include information regarding the appropriate percentage allocation of investments between active asset classes (such as asset allocation), the appropriate composition of performance factors, and / or the appropriate weighting of such factors. The scoring and ranking process identifies which asset management team has the past performance that best fits the client's desired investment experience (ie, which investment effect the client wants) Allows evaluation of investment options in a way that helps the client in some cases.

  Certain decision support functions disclosed herein as supported by a decision support platform may be performed manually by a person rather than being performed by the decision support platform. In one example, the functionality disclosed herein as supported by the first decision engine of a decision support platform is at least partially supported manually by a person, and the resulting information is subsequently supported by decision support. Available to decision support platforms to support platform functions (such as those supported by the decision support platform's second decision engine). In a specific example, the client specific template information is created manually, at least in part, rather than by the decision engine of the decision support platform.

  2A and 2B illustrate a method 200 for supporting financial consulting services for the information flow schematic 100 illustrated in FIG. 1 according to disclosed embodiments. Operation 202 is performed to obtain client background information in response to an interview with a financial service client. After obtaining the client background information, operation 204 is performed to enter relevant and / or required client background information into the decision support platform. Input of such information is an example that allows access to such information.

  In response to the input of the client financial objective, the decision support platform performs an operation 206 for determining an investment option (such as an appropriate asset allocation) corresponding to the client financial objective. After determining the investment options (eg asset allocation), the decision support platform calculates the operation 208 for determining the objective ranking (ie, objective quantification) of the calculated investment options (ie, calculated at operation 206). Objectively ranked investment options by performing an objective scoring and ranking operation on all active investment options within the various asset classes of investment options in a client-specific manner. Generate. In at least one embodiment of the invention disclosure provided herein, objective ranking determination includes objective and client-specific determination of performance scores (described in detail below) for each of the investment options, and client-specific performance. Ranking investment options according to information derived from the score.

  In one embodiment, the determination of investment options includes applying a logical condition filter to at least one of a number of performance and structure factors that can be expressed as numeric information, alphanumeric information, and / or date information. For example, such a conditional filter is closed (ie, does not accept investment from new investors) or has other structural or contextual characteristics (ie factors) that are undesirable or inappropriate for the client ( Used to omit funds (for example, the investment amount exceeds the prescribed investment amount). In one embodiment, determining investment options includes determining investment options in response to information derived from various aspects of the client specific template (ie, various client specific template information). Such a determination is performed by the first decision engine of the decision support platform in at least one embodiment of the disclosure disclosed herein, and the result information compiled by the first decision engine is subsequently determined by the decision engine platform. Provided to the second decision engine so that the scoring and ranking process can be performed by the second decision engine. In one embodiment, the client-specific template includes one or more of a number of filters and weights that can be multiple, the one or more filters and weights being performance factor information, client information, investment opportunity information, and / or investment performance information. Applies to

  After determining the objective ranking, the decision support platform performs an operation 210 to provide client-specific consulting information (eg, investment options, objective quantification, etc.). In one embodiment, providing such client specific consulting information includes preparing and outputting a client specific investment report by the document assembly engine of the decision support platform. In another embodiment, providing such client-specific consulting information includes a visual display of such information. In yet another embodiment, such providing includes making such information accessible for related operations of method 200 (not necessarily or explicitly shown). Accordingly, the decision support platform is preferably configured to prepare and output information as a printed and / or electronic document (ie, a report configured to be printed and / or electronically displayed).

  The client-specific investment report disclosed herein documents client-specific consulting information such as objectively ranked investment options. Such client-specific consulting information (such as objectively ranked investment options) is preferably presented for a number of variables depending on the information derived from the client's financial objectives. For example, various scenarios of investment options are presented depending on the desired multiple investment effects desired and information derived from the calculated related performance scores. Such investment effects are in accordance with information derived from performance criteria. In general, performance criteria according to the disclosed invention disclosed herein include criteria for returns, risk, related industry-defined asset classes, investment effect rules, and investment opportunities that correlate with client expectations. Specific examples of performance criteria and associated performance factors are shown in Table 1 below. Detailed information defining such performance criteria and their associated performance factors will not be described in detail, but will be understood by those skilled in the art (eg, financial systems and methodologies).

  In at least one embodiment of the client-specific investment report, the client-specific investment report includes an investment distribution among various asset classes, statistical / annual performance of investment options within the various asset classes, and such investments. Includes charts and tables showing the variance of the overall performance score of the options, client specific scoring and ranking of such investment options. In at least one embodiment, the client specific investment report includes a client specific evaluation of an effective investment alternative in response to information derived from the evaluation of such an effective investment alternative.

  After reviewing the client-specific consulting information, the credential advisor and / or Kim Yu Service Consultant (in consulting with the client) supports operation 212 to review the decision criteria that underlie the objective ranking of investment options. Such a review includes a review of performance criteria (eg, selection and weighting of factors) and correction and clarification of information related to client financial objectives. When the credential advisor and / or financial services consultant reviews any of the decision criteria, the method performs an objective ranking in operation 206 to determine investment options according to information derived from the revised criteria. Proceed to the operation to determine (ie, operation 208). If neither the credential advisor nor the financial services consultant review any of the decision criteria, the client-specific consulting information (such as the form of the client-specific investment report) will be submitted to the financial services client (the credential advisor will submit the information electronically through the decision support platform. Or the method continues to operation 214 to support delivery to a trusted advisor (such as personally supporting the presentation of information). After the financial services client has selected one or more investment options to which the fund will be allocated (eg, after consulting with a credential advisor), an operation 216 for entering the selected investment options into the decision support platform (confidence advisor). Or by financial services clients). Once the fund is allocated, the selected investment options are represented as the financial services client's investment portfolio.

  Periodically (eg, quarterly), operations 218 to support relative performance evaluation of the investment portfolio are performed through the decision support platform, thereby providing periodic performance information (ie, client specific decision information). Is created. As will be detailed later, relative performance assessment provides information for quantitatively and objectively assessing selected investment options. After supporting the relative performance evaluation of the investment portfolio, the decision support platform performs operation 220 to provide client specific decision information for the next operation. An example that could be the next operation involves outputting a periodic performance report that includes such periodic performance information at the request of a trusted advisor. In one embodiment, the periodic performance report is prepared and output by the document support engine of the decision support platform. After performing operation 220 to provide such client-specific decision information, the trusted advisor performs operation 222 to support the provision of such information for review by the financial services client.

  The decision support platform disclosed herein preferably plays no role between the trusted advisor and the financial services client. However, in other embodiments, the decision support platform disclosed herein may play a role between the trusted advisor and the financial services client. For example, the decision support platform may support editing information directly from the financial service client or may provide investment option information directly to the financial service client.

  FIG. 3 shows an example of an operation 206 for determining investment options. Operation 230 is performed by the performance support decision engine (ie, the first decision engine) of the decision support platform to access client background information, and operation 232 is performed by the performance criteria determination engine to access the decision base information. In one embodiment, client background information and decision base information are accessed from one or more databases by a performance criteria decision engine.

  When the client background information and the basic decision information are accessed, operation 234 is performed via the performance criteria determination engine to determine the corresponding performance criteria (such as investment effect parameters). Examples of corresponding investment effect parameters include parameters related to investment risk, parameters related to return on investment, parameters related to other structures and performance of investment, various investment allocation rules, investment opportunities and client financial expectations. Including parameters related to In at least one embodiment, the category of investment effect parameters includes investment allocation parameters. The performance criterion determination engine performs an operation 236 for determining the performance weighting factor according to the information derived from the investment effect parameter in response to the determination of the investment effect parameter. For example, to calculate and apply performance factors for risk minimization and return maximization, respectively. 80 and. A performance factor weight of 20 is used. . 80 /. A performance factor weighting ratio of 20 corresponds to the situation where the client financial objective indicates that the client is more interested in minimizing risk than maximizing return.

  After determining the performance factor weighting, the decision support platform investment option determination engine (ie, the second determination engine) performs operation 238 to access investment performance information (risk, return, other structure and performance information, etc.). The investment option determination engine then performs an operation 240 to determine investment options depending on the client's individual investment demand, desire, and / or goals. Each decision engine can support performance selection and weighting factor determination, investment effect parameter determination, objective investment scoring objective scoring and ranking determination without human intervention during each calculation operation. preferable.

  Functions (such as operations) supported by the performance criteria decision engine (ie, the first decision engine) of the decision support platform may be supported manually by a person rather than by the performance criteria decision engine. In such an embodiment, information from manually supported functions can continue to be used by the investment choice determination engine to support the functions of the investment choice determination engine.

  FIG. 4 illustrates an example of operation 218 for performing a relative performance assessment of an investment portfolio. Operation 260 is performed to determine a portfolio investment (ie, an investment option that currently includes the client's portfolio). In response to the portfolio investment determination, operation 262 is performed to determine a corresponding investment performance score for each individual investment in the portfolio, and operation 264 is performed to determine a corresponding overall investment performance score. The total investment performance score is a total score that represents all the total performance of individual portfolio investments.

  After the portfolio investments are determined, operation 266 is performed to determine a comparative investment index corresponding to each of the portfolio investments. The comparative investment index is an index that appropriately corresponds to each of the portfolio investments (for example, one that indicates the corresponding performance factor in the corresponding asset class). In response to determining the comparative investment index, operation 268 is performed to determine a corresponding investment index performance score for each of the comparative investment indexes, and operation 270 is performed to determine a corresponding total investment index performance score. The total investment index performance score is a total score representing all the total performance of the individual investment index. These individual and overall investment index performance scores are calculated in the same manner as used in operations 262, 264 described above (ie, using the same performance factor and the same performance factor weighting). After determining the various performance scores, operation 220 (FIG. 2B) is performed to provide information to related operations (eg, to print and / or display such periodic performance information).

  The determination of the overall investment index performance score combines each investment index according to information derived from the fund's actual allocation within the corresponding investment portfolio and / or at least one of risk and return criteria It is possible to include that. Similarly, the overall investment performance score may be determined based on information derived from the fund's actual allocation within the corresponding investment portfolio and / or the risk investment and / or return criteria. It is good also as including combining. Further, the decision support platform decision engine system and / or the decision support platform document assembly engine may perform the function of operation step 218 to perform a relative performance assessment of the investment portfolio.

  Accordingly, scoring and ranking of all active investment options in each asset class within the client's portfolio is performed. Scoring and ranking is performed using the same performance parameters and parameter weights used in the original scoring and ranking analysis used by the client to select client investment options. The various related asset indexes are scored and ranked in exactly the same way as investment options within the asset class to which a particular index is related. The scoring process generates an overall numerical score for each of the client's investment options, all other valid (unselected) investment options, and related indexes.

  When these numerical scores are used to classify the scoring results (eg from the highest overall score to the lowest overall score), all investment options are not only associated with the relevant index, but each asset class (selected and unselected) Both) and effectively and quantitatively. Therefore, the highest score, ie, the highest ranking option, has its composite overall score (that is, the score resulting from all the synthesis of the individual weighted performance factors used in the scoring process) desired by the client for a particular asset class It shows these options for which the past performance that best matches the investment performance to be made (that is, the desired performance for the asset class, and therefore the asset class is included in the portfolio) is evaluated.

  The investment index may correspond to an asset class corresponding to an individual portfolio investment. In such cases, the allocated investment (ie, selected investment option) and the multiple unallocated investments represented by the asset class (ie, all or one of the investment options not selected for funding). It is considered that relative performance evaluation will be conducted with

  FIG. 5 is a chart 300 showing a graphical display of performance scores shown for the corresponding asset class 301. In one example, chart 300 is included in a periodic performance report. The overall performance score 302 for each of the asset classes 303 in the portfolio is indicated by a graph feature of the first form (such as a corresponding first color horizontal bar). Shown in the context of individual managers and / or funds 304 is an overall score 305. Each performance score 306 of the investment index 308 is indicated by a second form graph feature (such as another symbol of the first color) superimposed on the first form graph feature. The total investment performance score 310 is indicated by a graph characteristic of the third form (such as a corresponding second color vertical bar). The overall index score 312 is indicated by a graph feature (such as a triangle) of the fourth form superimposed on the graph feature of the third form. In this way, the investment options selected by the financial service client are compared on the graph with appropriate benchmarks.

  The chart 300 of FIG. 5 is configured to provide an overview of portfolio performance using a bar graph that represents the score resulting from the valuation of individual assets including the portfolio along with the entire portfolio. Chart 300 shows the overall portfolio performance by comparing the “overall portfolio” score (ie, the bar adjacent to the “overall” word) with the “overall index” score (ie, the triangles stacked adjacent to the overall word). Provides a means to measure As shown in the figure, the total portfolio bar extends beyond the position of the total index triangle. A positive difference indicates that the total portfolio exceeds the total index in achieving the stated performance targets. Chart 300 similarly shows the performance of individual portfolio investments associated with individual overall index elements.

  The graphical representation of the overall index score 310 is proportional to the composite score of the portfolio (i.e., detailed in the following paragraph), and the score is compared to the overall index score 312 of the entire investment portfolio on the performance scale 311. Is located. The performance scale 311 functions as a means for measuring the performance (score etc.) based on the relative position of the graph display showing such a score. The graphical representation of each asset class performance score 302 is proportional to the overall score of the individual fund (or manager) and is positioned on the performance scale 311 such that each performance score 302 is compared to the associated index score 306 for that fund. ing. The graph display of the fund related total score index score 306 represents the performance of each fund.

  The overall performance score 302 for each individual fund and associated asset class 303 provides a summary of performance evaluations performed in each of the portfolio asset classes. In addition, the composition of the performance scores of the individual owned funds is used to determine the overall investment performance score 310. The score of the related index 308 is similarly synthesized and used to determine the overall index score 312. In one embodiment, such a synthesis is performed using the current market value of individual managers' holdings and the ratio of these holdings to the total value of the portfolio. For example, in an example where the manager's holding value is $ 5,000,000 and the total portfolio value is $ 100,000,000, 5% of the total portfolio score 302 is attributed to the manager's total investment score. Is. Further, the same 5% ratio is applied to the manager's related index score and overall index score synthesis decision.

  The performance of funds and their managers is generally considered for specific performance factors. For example, to find out which manager has the highest return in five years, the five-year average return is categorized. However, when multiple performance factors (ie performance criteria used for decision purposes) are used at the same time to evaluate the manager's performance, the overall score used to evaluate the overall manager / fund performance is obtained. Thus, the combination of the results of each factor is performed. If a large number of performance criteria (functionally used as decision criteria) are selected, the overall manager performance will be defined to meet specific performance and decision requirements (eg demand, targets, risk tolerance, etc.) In addition, a separate weight is assigned to each of the performance criteria. Visually displaying how the weighted performance criteria affect the overall score is useful for quickly identifying which decision criteria have the most impact on the overall score.

  Chart 314 in FIG. 6A and table 316 in FIG. 6B jointly illustrate an alternative embodiment representing the information shown in chart 300 in FIG. Although essentially the same information as that shown jointly in FIGS. 6A and 6B is presented in FIG. 5, the chart presentation of FIG. 5 gives a greater amount of information (ie, a given amount of space) This is advantageous in that it can be presented (as opposed to the presentation approach of FIGS. 6A and 6B).

  The charts shown in FIGS. 5, 6A, and 6B are examples of information configured for objective and relative evaluation of investment options by an investor / financial service client. Also, operations and / or approaches for creating all or part of the information contained in the charts shown in FIGS. 5, 6A, 6B may evaluate such information and / or such information. It is an example which performs relative evaluation of.

  FIG. 7 shows a table 325 having a plurality of multi-segment bars 327 (such as bars with different color divisions), each displaying a corresponding total score graphically. The length of each multi-segment bar 327 is proportional to the corresponding overall score 329 and is relative to all of the overall scores shown for comparison purposes. The various segments 330 of each bar 327 represent the relative performance of the corresponding weighted performance criteria. The length of each segment 330 represents a performance based weighted performance compared to a group of equivalents within the same asset class. A long segment represents a proportionally larger effect on the overall score. The order of the segments of each bar matches the display order of the performance standard labels 331 (such as 5-year returns) in the header part of Table 325. However, in examples where a specific segment of a specific bar is not shown, the manager does not have data for the corresponding performance criteria, or this performance criteria has little or no effect on the overall score of the correspondence due to a combination of minimum weight and / or low performance. Indicates no effect.

  The relative performance of performance criteria according to the present invention (i.e., criteria used to make investment decisions) is evaluated with respect to one or more reference points. The relative performance of the decision criteria for all equivalents is the first reference point. For example, comparing the length of the 5-year average return segment in Table 325 of Figure 7, the top level managers see a length difference of almost 35%, which is the same performance as that associated with the equivalent group. In other words, the difference. Performance related to the equivalent group is calculated using a scale of 5-year average return value. This scale is defined by all items with the same performance criteria, and each performance score is applied to this scale to find the relative rank within the group. Since the scale of each performance standard is taken into consideration in the graph display of the performance, it is useful for immediately comparing the results of the performance standard scores. In this way, large differences in performance among managers can be easily identified.

  The relative performance of the performance standard related to the overall performance score is the second reference point. When evaluating the relative performance of performance criteria for all bars, do not refer to performance criteria weighting. This is because the weight assigned to each performance criterion applies equally to the group of equivalents. However, the weight assigned to each performance criterion directly affects the overall score determination. For example, comparing the lengths of all top manager segments, it can be seen that most of the weight is placed on the 5-year return and 5-year standard deviation. In this example, 80% of the weight is placed in the combination of these two performance criteria, and on an overall score scale of 0 to 10, these two performance criteria mean that as many as 8 points can be added to the overall score. Unlike the 5-year performance standard, the combined weight of the 3-year return and 3-year standard deviation is only 17.5%, which can add 1.75 points to the overall score. The weight assigned to each performance criterion acts as a multiplier that defines the maximum impact the performance criterion has on the overall score and the maximum length of the corresponding segment of the bar in Table 2. By comparing the sizes of the 5-year performance standard and the 3-year performance standard, the influence of weighting can be easily understood.

  FIG. 8A shows an example of a weighted approach 335 for supporting performance evaluation according to the invention disclosure made herein. The weighted approach 335 shows how manager performance evaluation is performed in each asset class and shows the relationship between the performance characteristics and the performance criteria used. The multi-segment vertical bar 337 indicates a group of performance criteria 339 used for evaluation and the degree of influence (ie, weight) assigned to each. Each of the performance criteria 339 of the vertical bar 337 has one or more dependent performance factors 341 associated with it. The performance factors 341 associated with the common performance criteria 339 are subordinate to the specific performance criteria 339, thus providing a group of performance factors in some examples.

  Weights are individually assigned to performance factors 341 and indicate how much each performance factor 341 has in the group. Increasing the weight of any one performance factor in the group correspondingly decreases the weight assigned to one or more other performance factors in the group. In fact, the sum of all performance factor weights within a group must always be 100%. The same is true for the sum of all weights applied to the performance criteria 339 on which all of the performance factors 341 depend.

  The weighting of the various performance criteria 339 and performance factors 341 affects the performance score referred to here. In other words, each grouping of performance scores directly affects the performance scores. Since one of the performance standards 339 is given a weight of 50%, this performance standard dominates 50% of the performance scale (for example, 5 scales of the 10-point scale). Individual performance factors 341 subordinate to each performance criterion 339 indirectly affect the performance score. The indirect effect is determined by multiplying the weight assigned to the performance factor 341 by the weight of the performance criteria 339 on which it depends.

  8B and 8C show an example of a hierarchical weighting structure that represents an approach for using weights to determine performance scores. In practice, the weighting structure shown in FIGS. 8B and 8C and the weighting approach 330 shown in FIG. 8A accomplish the same purpose and generate the same type of information. The difference is how it is presented.

  The hierarchical structure includes a tree structure 350 in which the node 352 of the tree structure 350 is either a class or a performance factor (labeled “Factor” in FIGS. 8B and 8C). Tree structure 350 functions to distribute weights to performance factors. The weight assigned to the performance factor defines the potential impact of the performance factor on the scoring and ranking performed during the investment information evaluation (eg, the relative performance evaluation described above).

  The performance factor is the “leaf” of the tree and directly corresponds to the performance data recorded in the corresponding data set (ie, investment performance information). The performance factor is always the end node 354 at the branch of the tree 350. As shown in FIG. 8B, “Class 1A” is a parent class node of “Factor 2” (that is, a child class node of “Class 1A”), and is itself “Class 1” (“Class 1A”). It is a child class node of “parent class node” and is a sibling class node of “factor 1” and “class 1B” (that is, a sibling class node of “class 1A”).

  A class is a group of performance factors or some combination of performance factors and classes. A single class is a parent class node, but may be a child class node or a sibling class node. A factor is never a parent class node, only a child class node or a sibling class node. Nodes at the same hierarchical level assigned to the same parent class node total 100%. Alternatively, if the sum is not 100%, the sum is reduced to 100% while maintaining the weighted relationship between the assigned performance factor and the class. Performance factors assigned to classes are generally similar and have some common themes. The purpose of a class is to provide a way to influence the relative weights of all subordinate classes and performance factors related to the parent class.

  All nodes 352 in the tree 350 have assigned and / or calculated weights. These weights are assigned via a template by manual input or by some other type of decision process (such as the decision process of the performance criteria decision engine disclosed herein). It is necessary to standardize the weights of all nodes 352 to be 100% so that the weights are related to the subordinate parent class nodes. Once the relative weights are standardized, actual weights are calculated for each class node.

  As shown in FIG. 8C, the actual weight is calculated based on the relative weight of the node 352 of the weighted hierarchical structure. The actual weighting affects the scoring and ranking that takes place during the evaluation of investment information. When each node relative weight is multiplied by the actual weight of the parent node, the actual weight of each of the nodes 352 is obtained. Since the actual weight of the parent class node is necessary to calculate the actual weight of its children (ie, child class nodes), the hierarchical structure is processed from the highest node of the tree 350 to the lowest node of the tree. The actual weight is then applied to the investment performance data to generate a corresponding factor performance score. These individual factor performance scores are then combined to obtain an overall performance score.

  Using a hierarchical weighted structure is advantageous in that the effects of different load scales can be mixed. When the scales are combined by using weights in this way, the performance factor values can be evaluated using various scoring methods. For example, by such composition, a composite investment index performance score and a synthesized corresponding total investment index performance score are calculated. As shown in FIG. 8C, the combined tree portion 355 represents a plurality of performance factor weights that add up to weight each parent node 356.

  FIG. 9 illustrates a network system 400 (ie, a data processing system) configured to support financial consulting service functions, according to an embodiment of the invention disclosure performed herein. System 400 includes a decision support platform 402, a network interface device 404 coupled to decision support platform 402, and a network system 406 coupled to network interface device 404. Decision support platform 402 includes a database structure 407 accessible by decision support platform 402. Therefore, it is possible to transmit information between the decision support platform 402 and other entities (for example, a client computer, a financial service consultant computer, a computer that can download investment performance information, etc.), and such a financial consulting service function. The accessibility of the information necessary to perform the is obtained (such as by accessing a website where such functionality is accessible).

  The decision support platform 402 includes a performance criteria decision engine 408 (ie, a first decision engine), an investment option decision engine 410 (ie, a second decision engine), and a document assembly engine 412. The performance criteria determination engine 408 is an example of a means for executing the performance weight factor calculation function disclosed herein. Such performance weighting factor calculations may include information (such as logical condition filters and / or processing instructions) included in the client specific template.

  According to at least one embodiment of the present invention, the first decision engine is configured to support an initial allocation function (eg, support appropriate client-specific investment allocation and return on investment parameters). The investment selection decision engine 410 is an example of a means for performing the relative scoring and ranking (ie, quantification) of the investment option calculation function disclosed herein. The decision engine system of the decision support platform is defined herein as comprising a performance criteria decision engine and an investment option decision engine. Document assembly engine 412 is an example of a means for performing document preparation / output functions as disclosed herein. It is contemplated that the various engines can be physically implemented as separate or fully integrated software / hardware modules.

  The database structure 407 includes a decision information database (which can include rule sets) 414, an investment performance information database 416, client information and document layout information database 418. In at least one other embodiment, separate client information and document layout information databases are provided. Information (eg, rules) that the decision support platform 402 relies on to perform the performance criteria decision function disclosed herein is stored in the decision information database 414. Information that the decision support platform 402 relies on to perform the scoring and ranking calculation functions (ie, investment options) disclosed herein is stored in the investment performance information database 416. Information on which the decision support platform 402 depends to execute the document preparation / output function disclosed herein is stored in the client information / document layout information database 418.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, it is disclosed herein that decision support platform 402 is not a physically independent device or system. Rather, in at least one such embodiment, the decision support platform 402 is a functional included in functionality provided to multiple systems or system elements (eg, separate functional blocks linked via a network system). Platform. Therefore, the system elements configured to give such functions may or may not be provided at a common location, and may or may not be on a common computer.

  In at least one embodiment of the present invention, decision support platform 402 is a single decision engine (such as a single data processing program) configured to support all or part of the functionality of performance criteria decision engine 408. And an investment option determination engine 410 and a document assembly engine 412 are disclosed herein. In one example, a single decision engine program that functions in a suitable data processing system may include all of the functions of the performance criteria decision engine 408, the investment option decision engine 410, the document assembly engine 412 via a single data processing program. Support some. In another example, a single decision engine to include various functional modules that interact to support all or part of the performance criteria decision engine 408, investment choice decision engine 410, document assembly engine 412 functionality. Is shaped.

  Now, with reference to computer readable media according to embodiments of the present invention, the methods disclosed herein take the specific form of computer readable media including instructions for performing such methods. In one particular example, instructions are provided to perform various operations of the method 200 illustrated in FIGS. 2A and 2B to support financial consulting services. Instructions can be read by a decision support platform from a decision support platform memory device (eg, RAM, ROM, virtual memory, hard drive memory, etc.) by a decision support platform drive unit (eg, diskette, compact disk, tape cartridge, etc.) Accessed from the device or both. The computer readable medium includes, for example, a compact disk or a hard drive in which a computer program for executing a financial consulting service function according to an embodiment of the present invention is stored.

  The description of the method and system according to embodiments of the present invention has been presented so far in terms of financial effectiveness for investors, but is effective in the fields of commerce and housing lending, venture capital funding, investment banking services. It is considered that such a method and system can be specifically configured so as to exhibit the performance. Further, it is contemplated that such a method and system can be configured to provide effectiveness other than financial services. That is, the embodiment of the decision support platform function disclosed herein can be applied to uses other than financial services. Retail (e-commerce) usage, market research usage, human asset usage, dating services, raw material procurement are provided by the decision support platform functions for each client (or consumer) individual demand, purpose, and / or wish An example of such an application where an objective and unpredictable scoring and ranking evaluation function of all valid choices (ie, within a population of choices that can quantify differences) is beneficial It is.

  The present invention relates to support for financial consulting services. The methods and apparatus according to embodiments of the invention disclosed herein were ranked by quantification by trusted advisors (eg, agents, lawyers, brothers, local banks, etc.) that are not necessarily professional in the traditional financial services industry. Investment options are configured to be offered to clients. Thus, trusted advisors can gain the knowledge to prepare all of their clients' financial services demands in their traditional role as independent advice providers rather than as product salesmen. In this way, the client can give a high level of trust regarding the financial information provided and the person providing the financial information.

  A method according to embodiments of the invention disclosed herein and a system configured to perform such a method may include a dedicated support mechanism that includes a decision support platform, and a trusted advisor (i.e., partnership credential) accessing the method. To the advisor). A dedicated decision support platform allows partner trusted advisors to advise clients, adjust solutions to their demands, and outsource product research, relative valuation, execution and purchase responsibility. This unique outsourcing structure creates high efficiency, and partner credential advisors can spend more time interviewing and advising clients, which is the most important and best time to use. Clients no longer need to rely on brokers, insurance agents, or other product salesmen, and partner trusted advisors get most of the revenues that were previously routed to these brokers, agents, and salesmen. be able to.

  Furthermore, the method and system according to embodiments of the present invention are designed to address some of the increasingly important and annoying trends currently facing both consumers and professional advisory companies. Has been. Increasing the complexity and scope of valid choices creates more anxiety and stress among clients and their advisors (ie, those who help inform decision-making on product choices) and demands for reliable advice without preconceptions . As the range of valid options continues to grow, and the amount and complexity of information about this continues to increase, many investors will not even have time to know what the options are, and will be more confident out of them. Lose the time and ability to choose. Many investors inherently do not have the time or personal ability to identify what is really “best” for themselves and their families with respect to investment options.

  Access to an increasingly diverse array of financial product and service options is rapidly increasing along with increasingly vast and complex information about these options and doing the “best” for you and your family Consumers increasingly need help in objectively analyzing a large number of valid investment options. Embodiments of the present invention provide a solution to an increasingly wide range of demands for objective and reliable advice. The importance of this solution will continue to grow in parallel with the growth and development of knowledge-based economy and e-commerce. Partner trust advisors that have already received maximum credit from clients, through appropriate methods, training, technical tools and support, will continue to meet the growing client demand for more extensive and objective advice on financial products. It can be said that it can be fully satisfied.

  The foregoing detailed description has been made with reference to the accompanying drawings, which form a part hereof, and in which are shown by way of illustration specific embodiments in which the invention may be practiced. These embodiments and certain variations have been described in sufficient detail to enable those skilled in the art to practice the invention. It will be appreciated that other suitable embodiments may be utilized and that logical, mechanical, and electrical changes may be made without departing from the spirit or scope of the invention. For example, the functional blocks shown in the figures may be further combined or divided in a manner that does not depart from the spirit or scope of the invention. To avoid unnecessary detail, the description omits certain information well known to those skilled in the art. Therefore, the above detailed description is not limited to the specific forms presented, and conversely, alternatives, modifications, and equivalents that are legally included in the spirit and scope of the appended claims. Shall be included.

1 shows a schematic diagram of information flow according to an embodiment of the present invention. 1 illustrates a method for supporting a financial consulting service according to an embodiment of the present disclosure for the information flow schematic diagram illustrated in FIG. 1 illustrates a method for supporting a financial consulting service according to an embodiment of the present disclosure for the information flow schematic diagram illustrated in FIG. 3 illustrates an example of an operation for determining the investment option shown in FIG. FIG. 3 illustrates an example of operations for enabling relative performance evaluation of the investment portfolio illustrated in FIG. It is a chart which shows the graph display of the performance score by the Example of this invention. 6 shows an alternative embodiment for presenting the information shown in the chart of FIG. 6 shows an alternative embodiment for presenting the information shown in the chart of FIG. Fig. 5 shows a table with a plurality of multi-segment bars displaying a graph of corresponding overall scores. Fig. 4 illustrates an embodiment of a weighted approach configured to support performance evaluation according to the present invention. 2 shows an embodiment of a hierarchical weighted structure according to the present invention. 2 shows an embodiment of a hierarchical weighted structure according to the present invention. 1 illustrates a network system configured to support a financial consulting service function according to an embodiment of the present invention.

Claims (27)

A system for objective quantification of investment options,
At least one data processing device receiving data processing instructions;
An apparatus having a database accessed by the at least one data processing device and issuing the instructions;
The database stores at least information including client background information, basic decision information, and investment performance information,
The at least one data processing device comprises:
Forming a hierarchical weighted structure including a plurality of performance criteria and a plurality of performance factors selected to obtain a desired performance effect from the client background information read from the database and the decision basic information;
The hierarchical weighted structure includes a first performance factor group associated with a first performance criterion and a second performance factor group associated with a second performance criterion;
The plurality of performance criteria includes at least parameters relating to risk and return in the investment options;
The plurality of performance factors include at least values of the plurality of performance criteria calculated on a period basis,
Assigning a relative weight of each of the performance factors using each of the performance criteria selected to obtain the desired performance effect;
Using the investment performance information read from the database, a process of selecting a plurality of investment options for performing a relative evaluation;
Processing for calculating the value of the performance factor in each of the investment options;
A process of calculating the score of each performance factor from the value of each performance factor and the relative weight assigned thereto;
A process of calculating a total investment performance score by combining the scores of the performance factors in each of the investment options;
And a system for performing the relative evaluation of the plurality of investment options using at least the total investment performance score according to the command.   The system of claim 1, wherein the instructions cause the at least one data processing device to perform a process of ranking each investment option based on the total investment performance score. In the hierarchical weighted structure, the value of the first performance factor among the values of the performance factor is quantified based on a first score scale, and the value of the second performance factor among the values of the performance factor is set as the value. the system of claim 1, which is quantified based on the second score scale that is different from the first score scale. The hierarchical weighted structure includes a plurality of parent class nodes, at least one performance factor, and child class nodes corresponding to at least one of the plurality of parent class nodes;
The plurality of parent class nodes and the child class node are quantified based on a first score scale among first performance factor values of the performance factor values, and second of the performance factor values. The system according to claim 3, wherein the value of the performance factor is quantified based on the second score scale different from the first score scale. 5. The system of claim 4 , wherein each of the parent class nodes has at least one of a plurality of performance factors and a combination of at least one performance factor and at least one child class node. The at least one data processing device comprises:
Determining a set of predetermined indexes, each index corresponding to each investment in an investment portfolio;
The hierarchical weighted structure used in the process of determining the total investment performance score of each of the investment options and the relative weight included therein are used in the process of determining the total investment performance score for each of the indexes, The system according to claim 1, wherein a process of determining a total investment index performance score for each of the indexes is performed by the command in a manner similar to a process of determining the total investment performance score of the investment option. The at least one data processing device comprises:
Identifying the asset class corresponding to the allocated investment in the investment portfolio;
The system according to claim 1, wherein a process of relatively performing performance evaluation between the allocated investment and a plurality of unallocated investments found in the asset class is performed according to the command. A method for objective quantification of investment options,
At least one data processing device in the data computing system is connected to the at least one data processing device and accesses a memory having a database in which information including at least client background information, decision basic information and investment performance information is stored; By receiving data processing instructions,
The at least one data processing device comprises:
Forming a hierarchical weighted structure including a plurality of performance criteria and a plurality of performance factors selected to obtain a desired performance effect from the client background information read from the database and the decision basic information;
The hierarchical weighted structure includes a first performance factor group associated with a first performance criterion and a second performance factor group associated with a second performance criterion;
The plurality of performance criteria includes at least parameters relating to risk and return in the investment options;
The plurality of performance factors include at least values of the plurality of performance criteria calculated on a period basis,
Assigning a relative weight of each of the performance factors using each of the performance criteria selected to obtain the desired performance effect;
Using the investment performance information read from the database, a process of selecting a plurality of investment options for performing a relative evaluation;
Processing for calculating the value of the performance factor in each of the investment options;
A process of calculating the score of each performance factor from the value of each performance factor and the relative weight assigned thereto;
A process of calculating a total investment performance score by combining the scores of the performance factors in each of the investment options;
And a process of performing the relative evaluation of the plurality of investment options using at least the total investment performance score.   9. The method of claim 8, wherein the at least one data processing device performs a process of ranking each investment option based on the total investment performance score by accessing the memory and receiving the data processing command. In the hierarchical weighted structure, the value of the first performance factor among the values of the performance factor is quantified based on a first score scale, and the value of the second performance factor among the values of the performance factor is set as the value. the method of claim 8, which is quantified based on the second score scale that is different from the first score scale. The hierarchical weighted structure includes a plurality of parent class nodes, at least one performance factor, and child class nodes corresponding to at least one of the plurality of parent class nodes;
The plurality of parent class nodes and the child class node are quantified based on a first score scale among first performance factor values of the performance factor values, and second of the performance factor values. The method according to claim 10, wherein the value of the performance factor is quantified based on the second score scale different from the first score scale.   12. The method of claim 11, wherein each of the parent class nodes has at least one of a plurality of performance factors and a combination of at least one performance factor and at least one of the child class nodes. The at least one data processing device accesses the memory and receives an instruction for the data processing;
Determining a set of predetermined indexes, each index corresponding to each investment in an investment portfolio;
The hierarchical weighted structure used in the process of determining the total investment performance score of each of the investment options and the relative weight included therein are used in the process of determining the total investment performance score for each of the indexes, The method according to claim 8, wherein a process of determining a total investment index performance score for each of the indexes is performed in the same manner as the process of determining the total investment performance score of the investment option. The at least one data processing device accesses the memory and receives an instruction for the data processing;
Identifying the asset class corresponding to the allocated investment in the investment portfolio;
The method according to claim 8, further comprising performing a performance evaluation relatively between the allocated investment and the plurality of unallocated investments found in the asset class. A system for objective quantification of investment options,
At least one data processing device receiving data processing instructions;
An apparatus having a database accessed by the at least one data processing device and issuing the instructions;
The database stores at least information including client background information, basic decision information, and investment performance information,
The at least one data processing device comprises:
Forming a hierarchical weighted structure including a plurality of performance criteria and a plurality of performance factors selected to obtain a desired performance effect from the client background information read from the database and the decision basic information;
The hierarchical weighted structure includes a first performance factor group associated with a first performance criterion and a second performance factor group associated with a second performance criterion;
The plurality of performance criteria includes at least parameters relating to risk and return in the investment options;
In the hierarchical weighted structure, the value of the first performance factor among the values of the performance factor is quantified based on a first score scale, and the value of the second performance factor among the values of the performance factor is set as the value. the first score scale is quantified based on the second score scale that different,
Assigning a relative weight of each of the performance factors using each of the performance criteria selected to obtain the desired performance effect;
A process for determining a plurality of investment options using the investment performance information read from the database;
Processing for calculating the value of the performance factor in each of the investment options;
A process of calculating the score of each performance factor from the value of each performance factor and the relative weight assigned thereto;
A process of calculating a total investment performance score by combining the scores of the performance factors in each of the investment options;
A system for ranking each of the investment options based on the total investment performance score according to the command. The hierarchical weighted structure includes a plurality of parent class nodes, at least one performance factor, and child class nodes corresponding to at least one of the plurality of parent class nodes;
The plurality of parent class nodes and the child class node are quantified based on a first score scale among first performance factor values of the performance factor values, and second of the performance factor values. The system according to claim 15, wherein the value of the performance factor is quantified based on the second score scale different from the first score scale. The system of claim 16 , wherein each of the parent class nodes includes at least one of a plurality of performance factors and a combination of at least one performance factor and at least one of the child class nodes. The at least one data processing device comprises:
Determining a set of predetermined indexes, each index corresponding to each investment in an investment portfolio;
The hierarchical weighted structure used in the process of determining the total investment performance score of each of the investment options and the relative weight included therein are used in the process of determining the total investment performance score for each of the indexes, The system according to claim 15, wherein a process of determining a total investment index performance score of each of the indexes is performed by the command in a manner similar to a process of determining the total investment performance score of the investment option. The at least one data processing device comprises:
Identifying the asset class corresponding to the allocated investment in the investment portfolio;
The system according to claim 15, wherein a process of relatively performing performance evaluation between the allocated investment and a plurality of unallocated investments found in the asset class is performed according to the command. A method for objective quantification of investment options,
At least one data processing device in the data computing system is connected to the at least one data processing device and accesses a memory having a database in which information including at least client background information, decision basic information and investment performance information is stored; By receiving data processing instructions,
The at least one data processing device comprises:
Forming a hierarchical weighted structure including a plurality of performance criteria and a plurality of performance factors selected to obtain a desired performance effect from the client background information read from the database and the decision basic information;
The hierarchical weighted structure includes a first performance factor group associated with a first performance criterion and a second performance factor group associated with a second performance criterion;
The plurality of performance criteria includes at least parameters relating to risk and return in the investment options;
The plurality of performance factors include at least values of the plurality of performance criteria calculated on a period basis,
In the hierarchical weighted structure, the value of the first performance factor among the values of the performance factor is quantified based on a first score scale, and the value of the second performance factor among the values of the performance factor is set as the value. the first score scale is quantified based on the second score scale that different,
Assigning a relative weight of each of the performance factors using each of the performance criteria selected to obtain the desired performance effect;
A process for determining a plurality of investment options using the investment performance information read from the database;
Processing for calculating the value of the performance factor in each of the investment options;
A process of calculating the score of each performance factor from the value of each performance factor and the relative weight assigned thereto;
A process of calculating a total investment performance score by combining the scores of the performance factors in each of the investment options;
A method of ranking each of the investment options based on the total investment performance score. The hierarchical weighted structure includes a plurality of parent class nodes, at least one performance factor, and child class nodes corresponding to at least one of the plurality of parent class nodes;
The plurality of parent class nodes and the child class node are quantified based on a first score scale among first performance factor values of the performance factor values, and second of the performance factor values. The value of the performance factor is quantified based on the second score scale different from the first score scale,
21. The method of claim 20, wherein each of the parent class nodes includes at least one of a plurality of performance factors and a combination of at least one performance factor and at least one of the child class nodes. The at least one data processing device accesses the memory and receives an instruction for the data processing;
Determining a set of predetermined indexes, each index corresponding to each investment in an investment portfolio;
The hierarchical weighted structure used in the process of determining the total investment performance score of each of the investment options and the relative weight included therein are used in the process of determining the total investment performance score for each of the indexes, 21. The method of claim 20, wherein a process of determining a total investment index performance score for each of the indexes is performed, similar to a process of determining the total investment performance score of the investment option. The at least one data processing device accesses the memory and receives an instruction for the data processing;
Identifying the asset class corresponding to the allocated investment in the investment portfolio;
21. The method of claim 20, including performing a performance evaluation relative to the allocated investment found in the asset class and a plurality of unallocated investments. A system for objective quantification of investment options,
At least one data processing device receiving data processing instructions;
An apparatus having a database accessed by the at least one data processing device and issuing the instructions;
The database stores at least information including client background information, basic decision information, and investment performance information,
The at least one data processing device comprises:
Forming a hierarchical weighted structure including a plurality of performance criteria and a plurality of performance factors selected to obtain a desired performance effect from the client background information read from the database and the decision basic information;
The hierarchical weighted structure includes a first performance factor group associated with a first performance criterion and a second performance factor group associated with a second performance criterion;
The plurality of performance criteria includes at least parameters relating to risk and return in the investment options;
In the hierarchical weighted structure, the value of the first performance factor among the values of the performance factor is quantified based on a first score scale, and the value of the second performance factor among the values of the performance factor is set as the value. the first score scale is quantified based on the second score scale that different,
Assigning a relative weight of each of the performance factors using each of the performance criteria selected to obtain the desired performance effect;
A process for determining a plurality of investment options using the investment performance information read from the database;
Processing for calculating the value of the performance factor in each of the investment options;
A process of calculating the score of each performance factor from the value of each performance factor and the relative weight assigned thereto;
A process of calculating a total investment performance score by combining the scores of the performance factors in each of the investment options;
Determining a set of predetermined indexes, each index corresponding to each investment in an investment portfolio;
The hierarchical weighted structure used in the process of determining the total investment performance score of each of the investment options and the relative weight included therein are used in the process of determining the total investment performance score for each of the indexes, Similar to the process of determining the total investment performance score of the investment option, the process of determining the total investment index performance score of each of the indexes;
Ranking each investment option based on the total investment performance score;
A system for ranking each of the indexes based on the total investment index performance score according to the command. The at least one data processing device comprises:
Identifying the asset class corresponding to the allocated investment in the investment portfolio;
25. The system according to claim 24, wherein a process for relatively evaluating a performance is performed between the allocated investment displayed in the asset class and a plurality of unallocated investments. A method for objective quantification of investment options,
At least one data processing device in the data computing system is connected to the at least one data processing device and accesses a memory having a database in which information including at least client background information, decision basic information and investment performance information is stored; By receiving data processing instructions,
The at least one data processing device comprises:
Forming a hierarchical weighted structure including a plurality of performance criteria and a plurality of performance factors selected to obtain a desired performance effect from the client background information read from the database and the decision basic information;
The hierarchical weighted structure includes a first performance factor group associated with a first performance criterion and a second performance factor group associated with a second performance criterion;
The plurality of performance criteria includes at least parameters relating to risk and return in the investment options;
The plurality of performance factors include at least values of the plurality of performance criteria calculated on a period basis,
In the hierarchical weighted structure, the value of the first performance factor among the values of the performance factor is quantified based on a first score scale, and the value of the second performance factor among the values of the performance factor is set as the value. the first score scale is quantified based on the second score scale that different,
Assigning a relative weight of each of the performance factors using each of the performance criteria selected to obtain the desired performance effect;
Determining a set of predetermined indexes, each index corresponding to each investment in an investment portfolio ;
The read from the previous SL databases using investment performance information, a process of determining a plurality of investment choices,
Processing for calculating the value of the performance factor in each of the investment options;
A process of calculating the score of each performance factor from the value of each performance factor and the relative weight assigned thereto;
A process of calculating a total investment performance score by combining the scores of the performance factors in each of the investment options;
Ranking each investment option based on the total investment performance score;
The hierarchical weighted structure used in the process of determining the total investment performance score of each of the investment options and the relative weight included therein are used in the process of determining the total investment performance score for each of the indexes, Similar to the process of determining the total investment performance score of the investment option, the process of determining the total investment index performance score of each of the indexes;
A method of ranking each of the indexes based on the total investment index performance score. The at least one data processing device accesses the memory and receives an instruction for the data processing;
Identifying the asset class corresponding to the allocated investment in the investment portfolio;
27. The method of claim 26, further comprising performing a performance evaluation relative to the allocated investment found in the asset class and a plurality of unallocated investments.

Images