The products and services are very similar but there may be differences in how they are marketed, the fees charged, and the level of customer service provided.
Answer: C. Idiosyncratic Risk
Explanation:
Idiosyncratic risk which is also referred to as UNSYSTEMATIC RISK is the inherent risk involved when a specific asset is invested in.
The risk affects that specific asset and not the rest of the portfolio or the market. Hence it is the OPPOSITE of SYSTEMATIC RISK as Systematic risk affects all companies.
Idiosyncratic risks are more rooted in individual companies (or individual investments). Investors can mitigate idiosyncratic risks by diversifying their investment portfolios.
A Stock being dependant on a keep figure falls under this type of risk as it is unique to a certain company.
Steve Jobs was considered the Visionary behind Apple and so when he was ill and finally died, Apple Stock kept going down but not by too much.
Bless his soul.
When evaluating a single project for acceptance, the NPV and IRR decision rules will give the same result when The graph of the NPV versus discount rate decline smoothly as the discount rate increases.
Net present value, or NPV, is used to calculate the current total value of future payments. If the NPV of a project or investment is positive, it means that the discounted present value of all future cash flows related to that project or investment will be positive, and therefore attractive.
It is calculated by taking the difference between the present value of cash inflows and the present value of cash outflows over a period of time. As the name suggests, net present value is nothing but net off of the present value of cash inflows and outflows by discounting the flows at a specified rate.
Learn more about NPV (Net present value) here brainly.com/question/17185385
#SPJ4
This is tough to answer in 3-5 sentences, and tends to also be a heavy identifier of your possible political leanings. You'll have to apologize if some of mine leak out in the response, but this is a question we debate hotly more frequently than every 4 years.
In general, international trade can help increase the GDP and overall profits for US-based corporations. However, if all we do is export, and we don't import, other countries don't look favorably upon that and may heavily tax our goods to counter this.
I believe we do need to be thoughtful about the amounts and kinds of international trade that we engage in. For example, farming is always a hotly debated issue for international trade, in part because farmers in other countries with a dramatically lower cost of living OR farmers in countries with a favorable currency rate (exchange from their currency to our dollars gives them an advantage) can undercut our farmers here in the US, many of whom are already struggling.
There are also those who are worried that when we import produce from countries that have not outlawed pesticides we know are carcinogenic, for instance, this creates not only a disadvantage for US farmers, but also for consumers who may be concerned about health issues.
As another example of this, many countries outlawed import of US beef during the Mad Cow Epidemic. We in turn also placed bans on importing beef from the UK.
These are examples of why it's important to be thoughtful about trade, but there are certainly many others, including decline in production jobs within the US that have left cities like Detroit a ghost town (this was formerly the hub of our automotive industry production).
