我的回答：
1. From Active share/active risk perspective
Legends Fund: 18 > Kingston Fund: 8. It indicates taht Legends realize similar active risk but with a much smaller number of securities (40 vs 120) which si more efficient.
2. From factor weighting perspective, the unexplained part contribute less than kingston, meaning Legend done a better job in terms of allocating rewarded factors （4.1% vs 12.2%)
标准答案：
Answer:
An efficient, well-constructed portfolio should have 1) risk exposures that align with investor expectations, and 2) low idiosyncratic(unexplained) risk relative to total risk.
The investment philosophies of both the Legends Fund and the Kingston Fund focus on the quality risk factor. However, the factor risk contributions provided in Exhibit 1 suggest that quality is a significant factor exposure for the Legends Fund at-12.2% but is insignificant for the Kingston Fund at -0.2%. This supports Swanson's statement.
In addition, the amount of idiosyncratic risk is much higher as a percentage of total risk for the Kingston Fund, at 12.2%, versus just 4.2% for the Legends Fund. This also supports Swanson's statement.
这题我有几个问题：
1） An efficient, well-constructed portfolio should have 1) risk exposures that align with investor expectations, and 2) low idiosyncratic(unexplained) risk relative to total risk.这句话是不是有可能就像这题一样要考主观题能写出来的？
2）active share/active risk这个我在选择题里见过作为判断标准的，这个能拿出来再主观题里写吗？
我看另一道题的解答里是这么表述的：Finally, for managers with similar costs, fees, and alpha skills, if two products have similar active and absolute risks, the portfolio having a higher active share is preferred.
所以这道题是不是更应该写成for portfolio with similar active risk, the portfolio have higher active share is preferred (0.88>0.38)，而不是写active share/active risk计算出来的结果。这样就可以了？
3）The investment philosophies of both the Legends Fund and the Kingston Fund focus on the quality risk factor. However, the factor risk contributions provided in Exhibit 1 suggest that quality is a significant factor exposure for the Legends Fund at-12.2% but is insignificant for the Kingston Fund at -0.2%. This supports Swanson's statement.
这个回答是对应“risk exposures that align with investor expectations,”这个么？ 感觉我是不是能写出1）active share legend更大 2）legend的unexplained部分更小 就可以得分了？
4）这是另一题https://event.pzacademy.com/qa/167257
判断标准是三个
1）Well-constructed portfolios should have low idiosyncratic (unexplained) risk relative to total risk.
2）In comparing portfolios with comparable factor exposures, the portfolio with lower absolute volatility and lower active risk will likely be preferred, assuming similar costs.
3）Finally, for managers with similar costs, fees, and alpha skills, if two products have similar active and absolute risks, the portfolio having a higher active share is preferred.