FAQ Section | Frequently Asked Questions
F1 - Risk architecture & understanding
☐ The risk architecture of the investment form is understood in terms of content (not just described).
☐ Asymmetric risk/return profiles are known and accepted.
☐ Leverage, path or cascade effects are anticipated
☐ Correlations in stress phases are taken into account
☐ Rare extreme events are not ignored
Deduction: → High demands on Module A (theory) and Module C (risk competence)
F2 - Loss dynamics & responsiveness
☐ Speed and depth of loss are realistically assessed.
☐ Irreversible losses are mentally allowed
☐ Reaction time in the event of a loss is known and accepted
☐ Scope for action in the event of stress is available
☐ Losses do not jeopardize the overall structure
Deduction: → Critical in case of weak loss tolerance (module C) or reactive behavior (module D)
F3 - Decision density & fault tolerance
☐ The investment form requires frequent decisions (consciously recognized).
☐ Mistakes have noticeable consequences
☐ Wrong decisions do not automatically force follow-up decisions
☐ Decision logic is reproducible
☐ Deviations from the rules are the exception, not the rule
Deduction: → High demands on Module D (decision-making stability)
F4 - Psychological resilience
☐ Volatility is endured emotionally
☐ Drawdowns do not lead to impulsive action.
☐ Time pressure does not shorten decisions
☐ Social comparability does not excessively influence decisions
☐ Loss of control is accepted
Conclusion: → Central role of Module C (mental sustainability) and Module E (reflection)
F5 - Control & implementation capability
☐ The investment form is operationally controllable, not just explainable.
☐ Practical experience goes beyond individual cases.
☐ Technical / organizational requirements are manageable.
☐ Processes also work under stress.
☐ Dependencies on third parties are known.
Deduction: → High requirements for Module B (practice) and Module D (implementation)
F6 - External dependencies & uncertainty
☐ Exogenous risks are accepted.
☐ Event risks are not rationalized.
☐ Regulatory or structural interventions are factored in.
☐ Liquidity or counterparty risks are known.
☐ Non-influenceability is not compensated for.
Deduction: → Critical with weak acceptance of uncertainty (module C & E)
F7 - Discrepancy analysis (core of the derivation)
☐ Risk requirements do not exceed the level of knowledge.
☐ Risk requirements do not exceed the depth of experience.
☐ Risk requirements match risk maturity.
☐ Decision requirements match decision stability.
☐ Psychological stress matches reflective ability.
Deduction: → Discrepancies = increased appropriateness risks