麻烦老师帮忙看一下我这样回答是否正确，谢谢

NO.PZ201805280100000401 问题如下 scuss two reasons why the proposeasset allocation is inappropriate for Titan. The proposeasset allocation for Titis not appropriate because:1 Given the shift in enrollment tren anclining nations resulting from the sanctions, Titwill likely neegreater liquity in the future because of the increaseprobability of higher outflows to support university operations. The proposeasset allocation shifts Titan’s allocation into risky assets (increases the relative equity holngs ancreases the relative bonholngs), whiwoulintrogreater uncertainty to their future value.2 Titis relatively small for the proposeaition of private equity. Access to suasset class private equity mconstrainefor smaller asset owners, suTitan, who mlathe relateinterninvestment expertise. Aitionally, the Sun-Fin Private Equity Funminimum investment level is $1 million. This level of investment in private equity woul10% of Titan’s totportfolio value. Given Titan’s clining financiposition e to clining enrollments anits resulting potentineefor liquity, private equity this minimum level of investment is not appropriate for Titan. The percent private equity funis high for a small asset size enwment.Anwith falling operating revenue from tuition, the enwment nee more liquity to funthe spenng.

NO.PZ201805280100000401 问题如下 Mark Bor a financiaiser, workswith two university fountions, the TitState Fountion (Titan) antheForart University Fountion (Forart). He meets with eauniversityfountion investment committee annually to review funobjectives anonstraints.Titan’s portfolio ha market value of $10million. After his annumeeting with its investment committee, Bornotesthe following points:■ Titmust spen3% of its beginning-of-the-yearasset value annually to meet legobligations.■ The investment committee seeks exposureto private equity investments anrequests Bors review of the Sun-Fin PrivateEquity Funa potentinew investment.■ A recent clining trenin enrollment isexpecteto continue. This is a concern because it hleto a loss ofoperating revenue from tuition.■ Regulatory sanctions anpenalties arelikely to result in lower nations over the next five years.Borsupervises two junior analysts annstructs one to formulate new allocations for Titan. This analyst proposes theallocation presentein Exhibit 1. scuss two reasons why the proposeasset allocation is inappropriate for Titan. The proposeasset allocation for Titis not appropriate because:1 Given the shift in enrollment tren anclining nations resulting from the sanctions, Titwill likely neegreater liquity in the future because of the increaseprobability of higher outflows to support university operations. The proposeasset allocation shifts Titan’s allocation into risky assets (increases the relative equity holngs ancreases the relative bonholngs), whiwoulintrogreater uncertainty to their future value.2 Titis relatively small for the proposeaition of private equity. Access to suasset class private equity mconstrainefor smaller asset owners, suTitan, who mlathe relateinterninvestment expertise. Aitionally, the Sun-Fin Private Equity Funminimum investment level is $1 million. This level of investment in private equity woul10% of Titan’s totportfolio value. Given Titan’s clining financiposition e to clining enrollments anits resulting potentineefor liquity, private equity this minimum level of investment is not appropriate for Titan. Liquity anvolatility consiration. A recent clining trenin enrollment is expecteto continue. This is a concern because it hleto a loss of operating revenue from tuition. Regulatory sanctions anpenalties are likely to result in lower nations over the next five years. All of those signincate the future contribution woulcrease so higher liquity anlower volatility is nee However, Titincreaseits allocation to PE funancreaseallocation to Equity funanbon. It woulbring lower liquity anhigher risk. It woulinappropriate. Titis a small fountion whihtotasset of $10 million. Susmall asset size woulhave lower alternative asset investment professions anit is harto have resourof outsi managers. Titallocate 10% of asset to PE fun It woulinappropriate.

NO.PZ201805280100000401 问题如下 scuss two reasons why the proposeasset allocation is inappropriate for Titan. The proposeasset allocation for Titis not appropriate because:1 Given the shift in enrollment tren anclining nations resulting from the sanctions, Titwill likely neegreater liquity in the future because of the increaseprobability of higher outflows to support university operations. The proposeasset allocation shifts Titan’s allocation into risky assets (increases the relative equity holngs ancreases the relative bonholngs), whiwoulintrogreater uncertainty to their future value.2 Titis relatively small for the proposeaition of private equity. Access to suasset class private equity mconstrainefor smaller asset owners, suTitan, who mlathe relateinterninvestment expertise. Aitionally, the Sun-Fin Private Equity Funminimum investment level is $1 million. This level of investment in private equity woul10% of Titan’s totportfolio value. Given Titan’s clining financiposition e to clining enrollments anits resulting potentineefor liquity, private equity this minimum level of investment is not appropriate for Titan. Titan's market value is 10 million, view small asset class. small aseet class sonot have well goverancapacity, anno access to top manager, it cannot investing 10% in alternatives fun(Sun-Fin Private Equity), especially SUn-Fin private equity hfunminimum investment, it cannot buila well versify portfolio.a recent clining trenin enrollment is expecteto continue, university overall buet will rely more on Forhart, also, regulatory sanction anpenalties are likely to result in lower nations, Forhart externatinflow will crease. both of these contion suggest Forhart neea higher liquity, lower risk tolerance. so it cannot allocate thmuin alternatives, whih highly illiqui profile

NO.PZ201805280100000401 问题如下 scuss two reasons why the proposeasset allocation is inappropriate for Titan. The proposeasset allocation for Titis not appropriate because:1 Given the shift in enrollment tren anclining nations resulting from the sanctions, Titwill likely neegreater liquity in the future because of the increaseprobability of higher outflows to support university operations. The proposeasset allocation shifts Titan’s allocation into risky assets (increases the relative equity holngs ancreases the relative bonholngs), whiwoulintrogreater uncertainty to their future value.2 Titis relatively small for the proposeaition of private equity. Access to suasset class private equity mconstrainefor smaller asset owners, suTitan, who mlathe relateinterninvestment expertise. Aitionally, the Sun-Fin Private Equity Funminimum investment level is $1 million. This level of investment in private equity woul10% of Titan’s totportfolio value. Given Titan’s clining financiposition e to clining enrollments anits resulting potentineefor liquity, private equity this minimum level of investment is not appropriate for Titan. 1.The asset size of Titan’s portfolio is small, whiis only $10 million. Anit seeks exposure to private equity investments thnee a high minimum amount thseems too mufor Titan.2.Titmust spen3% of its beginning-of-the-yeasset value annually to meet legobligations.It means thasset allocation for Titshoulquite liquity anshort time. But the private equity is illiquianlong term. So it's inappropriate for Titan.