vania-janet/multiturn-rag-retrieval-data huggingface dataset:
Well kind of hard to give an answer without seeing the underlying syllabus, but judging by the title of the majors here's what the career paths *might* be.  Personal Financial Planning generally leads to a career in financial planning wherein clients come to you and explain to you their future goals and you have to devise an investment plan which adheres to their assets and liabilities structure. I'm getting a sense that the major is a precursor to the CFP certification; so check out the CFP Board's website.  Finance Major is *probably* the major which leads to a career in investment banking or investment management (wherein you'll probably deal with institutional clients rather than individuals).  It's worth noting that the two majors probably share courses.
You want CFP or CFA who is also a fiduciary, meaning that by law they have to put your interests ahead of their own. Financial planners who are not fiduciaries can, and often do, recommend investment vehicles that earn them the most commission with little regard of your financial goals. If you already have $500,000 to invest and racking up $100,000 a month you probably qualify for most institutions private client programs. That means that the firm/advisor will look at your financial situation and come up with a custom-tailored investment plan for you which should also include tax planning. I would start with whatever financial institutions you already work with - Schwab, your bank etc. Set up a meeting and see what they have to offer. Make sure you interrogate them about their fees, their licenses/certifications and above all if they are a fiduciary.
A financial advisor is a service professional.  It is his/her job to do things for you that you could do for yourself, but you're either too busy to do it yourself (and you want to pay somebody else), or you'd rather not. Just like some people hire tax preparers, or maids, or people to change their oil, or re-roof their houses. Me, I choose to self-manage.  I get some advise from Fidelity and Vanguard.  But we hired somebody this year to re-roof our house and someone else to paint it.
"I just found out my financial advisors are not fiduciaries. they manage a very large fund and have a board of trustees. they have a 30-year track record of great results. I asked why would the wealth managers not be fiduciaries if they will only ever act in the best interest of the clients and was told ""I would assume because they don't have to be, the assets aren't theirs, they belong to the fund""  Should I run?"
CEOs have multiple fiduciary duties, which fall into three broad categories:  care, loyalty, and disclosure.  You are probably referring to the duty of loyalty:  to act, in good faith, in the best interests of shareholders, putting shareholders' interests above the CEOs' own personal interests.
"From the Fidelity site: Inheritor Services for guidance and support through the process of settling an estate. Trust accounts and administrative services to help you control how your wealth is distributed, reduce probate exposure, and potentially reduce estate taxes. Charitable strategies to help enhance your giving and potential tax benefits. Here's a link to their site section for it: Fidelity Wealth Planning Not sure why you couldn't find a definition.  I found this using Google to search ""wealth planning""."
What else would wealth be in if not financial assets? Real estate or art?   Financial assets are generally ownership stakes in a company, or promises from a company/government to repay you money that you've lent them.   I guess I don't see how it could be Dystopian at all.
A derivative is a financial instrument of a special kind, the kind “whose price depends on, or is derived from, another asset”. This definition is from John Hull, Options, Futures and Other Derivatives – a book definitely worth to own if you are curious about this, you can easily find old copies for a few dollars. The first point is that a derivative is a financial instrument, like credits, or insurances, the second point is that its price depends closely from the price of something else, the mentioned asset. In most cases derivatives can be understood as financial insurances against some risk bound to the asset. In the sequel I give a small list of derivatives and highlight the assets and the risk they can be bound to. And first, let me point out that the definition is (marginally) wrong because some derivatives depend on things which are not assets, nor do they have a price, like temperature, sunlight, or even your own life in the case of mortgages. But before going in this list, let me go through the remaining points of your question. What is the basic idea and concept behind a derivative? As already noted, in most cases, a derivative can be understood as a financial insurance compensating from a risk of some sort. In a classical insurance contract, one party of the contract is an insurance company, but in the broader case of a derivative, that counterparty can be pretty anything: an insurance, a bank, a government, a large company, and most probably market makers. How is it really used, and how does this deviate from the first point? Briefly, how does is it affecting people, and how is it causing problems? An important point with derivatives is that it can be arbitrarily complicated to compute their prices. Actually what is hidden in the attempt of giving a definition for derivatives, is that they are products whose price Y is a measurable function of one or several random variables X_1, X_2, … X_n on which we can use the theory of arbitrage pricing to get hints on the actual price Y of the asset – this is what the depends on means in technical terms. In the most favorable case, we obtain an easy formula linking Y to the X_is which tells us what is the price of our financial instrument.
A CPA (accountant) would also be pretty meaningful. A law degree (and estate law know-how) is very relevant to many planning situations, too. Some not-very-meaningful certifications include Certified Mutual Fund Specialist (which isn't bogus, but it's much easier to get than CFP or CFA); Registered Investment Adviser (RIA) which mostly means the person is supposed to understand securities fraud laws, but doesn't mean they know a lot about financial planning. There are some pretty bogus certifications out there, many have ""retirement"" or ""senior"" in the name. A good question for any planner is ""Are you a fiduciary?"" which means are they legally required to act in your interests and not their own. Most sales-oriented advisors are not fiduciaries; they wouldn't charge you a big sales commission if they were, and they are not ""on your side"" legally speaking. It's a good idea to check with your state regulators or the SEC to confirm that your advisor is registered and ask if they have had any complaints. (Small advisors usually register with the state and larger ones with the federal SEC). If they are registered, they may still be a salesperson who isn't acting in your interests, but at least they are following the law. You can also see if they've been in trouble in the past. When looking for a planner, one firm I found had a professional looking web site and didn't seem sketchy at all, but the state said they were not properly registered and not in compliance. Other ideas A good book is: http://www.amazon.com/Smart-Simple-Financial-Strategies-People/dp/0743269942 it's very approachable and you'd feel more confident talking to someone maybe with more background information. For companies to work with, stick to the ones that are very consumer-friendly and sell no-load funds. Vanguard is probably the one you'll hear about most. But T. Rowe Price, Fidelity, USAA are some other good names. Fidelity is a bit of a mixture, with some cheap consumer-friendly investments and other products that are less so.
"BTW - there are other areas that are ""more"" big 4 accounting centric:  - Tax.  Tax strategy, tax compliance, etc.  - Compliance/Reporting.  SEC compliance/report.  SOX 404 compliance, etc.  And still others in finance that are more investment related:  - Treasury.  Management of cash balances, securities, hedging (currency, interest rates, short-term/overnight lending/borrowing functions).  Function is under the CFO.  - Pension fund mgmt.  Sometimes there is a pension fund within a company and they have hired investment managers to manage the fund."
The relationship is not linear, and depends on a lot of factors. The term you're looking for is efficient frontier, the optimal rate of return for a given level of risk. The goal is to be on the efficient frontier, meaning that for the given level of risk, you're receiving the greatest possible rate of return (reward). http://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/efficientfrontier.asp
"You are correct that it could refer to any of the types of interest rates that you've mentioned. In general, though, phrases such as ""rising interest rates"" and ""falling interest rates"" refer to the Federal Funds Rate or LIBOR. These are the interest rates at which banks in the U.S. and U.K., respectively, are lending money to each other."
A derivative in finance is simply any asset whose value is based on the value of another asset or based on the value of a group of assets. A derivative contract is a type of contract (usually a 'standardized contract') with specific payout instruction based on the price changes of a different asset. The basic idea is that it becomes easier to make a claim to an asset or property (and profit from this claim), without needing to physically transfer it (or even the title to said asset), and use much less capital to do so (reduce risk). They become problematic when multiple people may have claims to the real asset, or when the value of the derivatives changes very quickly or are hard to calculate. There are also liquidity problems the further you get from the real asset. This is not a problem for all kinds of derivatives contracts. And you must recognize that derivatives are used colloquially in a way that has nothing to do with reality to cause fear in people/investors that are not financially savvy. Many derivatives also have dubious or no economic purposes such that regulators don't allow them to be traded since they can't see how it is different from gambling. This is seen in financial markets that are less liberalized or cultures with puritanical backgrounds. Typically the trick is to convince regulators that the derivative or financial product helps with reducing risk and hedging and it will get approved. I've mentioned some terminology, but this depends specifically on what kind of derivatives contract you become interested in. Swaps, Credit Default Swaps, Futures, Options, Options on Futures, Leveraged Exchange Traded Funds, Inverse Leveraged Exchange Traded Funds, warrants, and more all have their own terminology. How to trade them in a simulation? It all depends on which financial product you really become interested in.
"Someone's (or, a bank's) ""exposure to equities"" refers to the amount of value which has a risk that fluctuates with the equities market (ie: the stock market). In very broad terms, I think it might make sense to say that exposure to equities could mean, for example, owning many rental properties, if the rental market was ""highly correlated"" with the equities market. That is - if house prices go down when the equities market goes down, and if that relationship is very strong, then owning a house means you are exposed to the equities market.  However, in the sense it is used there, it seems to mean direct exposure to equities - ie: owning stocks and stock-based funds."
If someone recommends a particular investment rather than a class of investments, assume they are getting a commission and walk away. If someone recommends whole life insurance as an investment vehicle, walk away. Find someone whose fiduciary responsibility is explicitly to you as their client. That legally obligated them to consider your best interests first. It doesn't guarantee they are good, but it's done protection against their being actively evil.
"This is the best tl;dr I could make, [original](https://jacobinmag.com/2017/10/finance-capital-shareholders-profit-market) reduced by 81%. (I'm a bot) ***** &gt; The term financialization is used all over the place, but it&amp;#039;s usually defined in a pretty circular way: financialization means &amp;quot;More finance,&amp;quot; more things controlled by finance.  &gt; The role of finance in enforcing a certain kind of policy on the state, a certain kind of logic, a certain kind of organization - whether it&amp;#039;s the bond market or whoever else we imagine here - is even more clear-cut.  &gt; To me, that&amp;#039;s a narrower, more specific, and maybe more fruitful way of thinking about financialization than just &amp;quot;There&amp;#039;s more finance.""   ***** [**Extended Summary**](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/78t6so/the_disruptors_jacobin_magazine_via/) | [FAQ](http://np.reddit.com/r/autotldr/comments/31b9fm/faq_autotldr_bot/ ""Version 1.65, ~235206 tl;drs so far."") | [Feedback](http://np.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%23autotldr ""PM's and comments are monitored, constructive feedback is welcome."") | *Top* *keywords*: **logic**^#1 **More**^#2 **finance**^#3 **way**^#4 **corporation**^#5"
I have no idea where this lie started and why it is perpetuated. A CEOs only fiduciary duty is to maintain shareholder value. Not increase it maintain it. If the stock price remains at $100 for 20 years congrats it’s been maintained and you’ve fulfilled your fiduciary duty
It's a tech buzzword. OK I'm being a bit glib.  A Wealth Management Platform is a software system designed to help people track their investment portfolios and research new investments.  Sometimes, trusts and small investment firms will use these platforms as well but they will often have more specialized separate systems for portfolio tracking and research. There is a large variety of platforms out there all trying to be the best platform for you... or someone else.  Some will have websites and be open to all with money and some will be applications and only target some types of investors.  Some will have robo-advising (Wealthfront), a human adviser (Merrill) or have none at all.  Some will have nice graphical tools to track your portfolio or great research tools or both (I try not to recommend products on this site).  Some can be designed to nudge you into their ideology (Vanguard). All, though, have a technology team behind them to make investing easier for you (or their investment advisers) or to sell you their products.  You get the picture.
"I'm looking to leave my corporate finance position in the next several months. Looking at positions externally with more responsibilities in the same realm or to move to a financial services type role in consulting or similar. A lot of job postings call out ""financial modeling"" as a desired skill. What specifically is meant by this? Modeling cash flows? Estimating P&amp;Ls given some assumptions? Valuation? I'm in Excel all day in my role but still can't seem to make sense of what I should be doing to prepare for a next step in my early career. The ""models"" I typically work with involve calculating accruals or analyzing sales/ margin data in my corporate environment which has become very stale as of late. Thanks!"
It means someone's getting paid too much. I'd check the sharpe ratio and compare that to similar funds along with their expense ratio. So in some scenarios it's not necessarily a bad thing but being informed is the important thing
Are you looking specifically at financial services; or what the people in your company's finance department do all day?  Investopedia has a layman overview of most Financial Services jobs: http://www.investopedia.com/university/financial-careers/  Corporate Finance is essentially divided into capital budgeting and working capital management, with dozens of titles for people doing these two things.  Not to be confused with Accounting, which is tracking everything.  The two are often housed together because finance needs accounting for their starting point on anything.
As an advertising slogan, it generally implies saving monthly into an investment account. If you do pay yourself first, basically making saving/investing part of your budget, the intent is that you won't get to the end of the month with nothing left to save, because you will have already done it.
Being a successful CFP is 100% about convincing other people to give you their money. Managing 90% of people's finances is sticking to the foundationals and keeping them in the market long term. OP doesn't want to be a hedge fund or PE guy doing complex transactions, he wants CFP. He needs to be able to sell himself, because it's what he'll be doing his whole career.
Actually what is hidden in the attempt of giving a definition for derivatives, is that they are products whose price Y is a measurable function of one or several random variables X_1, X_2, … X_n on which we can use the theory of arbitrage pricing to get hints on the actual price Y of the asset – this is what the depends on means in technical terms. In the most favorable case, we obtain an easy formula linking Y to the X_is which tells us what is the price of our financial instrument. But in practice, it can be very difficult, if at all possible, to determine a price for derivatives. This has two implications: Persons possessing sophisticated techniques to compute the price of derivatives have a strategic advantage on derivatives market, in comparison to less advanced actors on the market. Organisation owning assets they cannot price cannot compute their bilan anymore, so that they cannot know for sure their financial situation. They are somehow playing roulette. But wait, if derivatives are insurances they should help to mitigate some financial risk, which precisely means that they should help their owners to more accurately see their financial situation! How is this not a contradiction? Some persons with sophisticated techniques to compute the price of derivatives are actually selling complicated derivatives to less knowledgeable persons. For instance, many communes in France and Germany have contracted credits whose reimbursements have a fixed interest part, like in a classical credit, and a variable interest part whose rate is computed against a complicated formula involving the value of the Swiss frank at each quarter starting from the inception of the credit. (So, for a 25 years running credit of theis type, the price Y of the credit at its inception depends on 100 Xs, which are the uncertain prices for the Swiss frank each quarter of the 25 next years.) Some of these communes can be quite small, with 5.000 inhabitants, and needless to say, do not have the required expertise to analyse the risks bound to such instruments, which in that special case led the court call the credit a swindling and to cancel the credit. But what chain of events leads a 5.000 inhabitants city in France to own a credit whose reimbursements depends on the Swiss frank?
"They are called ""financial products"" because they are contracts that are ""produced"" by the financial industry. For example, you could also say that a car manufacturer does not sell you a car, but a contract that will gives you ownership of a car. And, if a contract is a service and not product, in that case a car manufacturer is only selling services. It seems like it is more about the definition of ""product"" than ""financial product"". I think that as long as something is produced by the effort of labor, it could be called a product, and since financial contracts are produced by the people working in the finance industry, they can be qualified as products too. Maybe this page of wikipedia could explain things better than I just did: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Product_%28business%29"
IANAL, nor am I a financial professional. However, I've just looked into this because of a relative's death, and I have minor children. I am in the US. First, a named beneficiary on many accounts means that any proceeds are kept out of the estate and do not have to go through probate. That usually means that they're available much more quickly.  Second, a beneficiary statement trumps a will. The account may pay out long before a will is even filed with the probate court.  Third, you can name a trust as the beneficiary. In this case, because you want to make sure the money goes to your children, that's likely your best option.
"I assume it's some kind of service that will help me make more money somehow No, wealth management is helping you keep the wealth you have, not to become more wealthy.  Insurance sales, portfolio management, estate planning, and trust formation (to avoid estate taxes) are common services associated with ""wealth management"". Wikipedia already has a pretty good definition."
Interest means that the money on the accounts belongs to you, regardless of who's name is the account titled to. For example, if you give money to someone (non-US person, say,  trying to avoid FBAR requirements) and that person puts it in his account but will give you money whenever you ask for it - you have interest in that account. This is in order for people not to avoid FBAR requirements by putting their money into someone's else accounts. Signature Authority means that although the account is not in your name, and the money on it is not your money - you have the right to access that account and perform operations on it. This usually happens when people are employees of a company and have signature authority over the company's accounts, but it is also frequently the case for people having signature authority over the accounts that belong to their family members (for example - your parents are not US persons, but they gave you access to their account because they don't know how to work with the bank and you do - you have signature authority over the account). If you have your own account - you have both interest in it and signature authority over it.
"A ""covenant"" is a solemn promise to engage in or refrain from a specified action. Every company must do a balancing act while declaring the dividends in terms of companies interest (can it use the surplus cash to generate more revenue) to shareholders' interests, giving back to them the profits that due. Many countries have regulations governing as to when and how much the dividends may be given. It also lays out the policy about declaring dividends to protect everyones' interest. For example if the company has a huge suit pending against it, the company is not supposed to distribute the surplus cash as dividends and when the suit goes against it, its left when no money to pay ... or other such examples where the interests of one or the other party is compromised. The company law board ensures that all this is adhered to in a fair manner. So essentially ""these covenants include provisions about passing dividends"", means that due diligence has be exercised by the company in order to arrive at the dividends that are to be paid out."
"Just to clarify, In wikipedia when it says  It is defined as a market in which money is provided for periods longer than a year They are referring to the company which is asking for money. So for example the stock market provides money to the issuing company of an IPO, indefinitely. Meaning the company that just went public is provided with money for a period longer than a year. The definition in Investopedia basically says the same thing Wikipedia does it is just phrased slightly different and leaves out the ""for periods longer than a year"".  For example Wikipedia uses the term ""business enterprises"" and ""governments"" while Investopedia uses the term private sector and public sector, in this context ""business enterprise"" is ""private sector"" and ""governments"" is ""public sector""  So in the sense of the length debt is issued yes, money market would be the opposite of a capital market but both markets still offer a place for governments and companies to raise money and both are classified as financial markets."