Generally in most cases, there are certain three distinct states that can generally require the usage of a quantitative model.
In a case where we are unable to observe such a stipulation not being contented then every model that is being considered will have to be forced to ascribe mathematical values for the incompetent characteristics or attitudes , that can ultimately guide to distortions in several conclusions that are consequently obtained from each of the models
Still, wherever all of the significant issues are quantified, there can exist other issues those that are linked with the information and data that may prevent the exploitation of a quantitative model. If for instance the specific data are undependable or in some cases are exceedingly pricey in terms of the time it may require to be collected in or the funds it would cost to assemble, then in the above cases the use of a quantitative model might not be appropriate feasible.
2. The rationale ought to rivet a certain intensity of prejudice or delineation which can only be attained through certain specific mathematical and quantitative comparisons. Some examples of these maybe :
It is said by researchers and analysts that if the chief rationale seems to be achievable devoid of the use of a certain specific quantitative model, it is then advised to inquire about the response in a non-quantitative manner. The rationale behind this being, the fact that the utter intricacy and information congregation essential for nearly all of the quantitative models know how to be factually reasonable if it is vital.
3. An occurrence wherein the scheme of significance encompasses an important amount of responses on the intensity of aggregation necessary. This is most commonly a situation wherein the behavior and effect of a certain variable X tends to affect a certain variable Y, and vice versa. If we observe all the definitions of almost all the quantitative models that exist, we would be able to comprehend the fact that in some cases they would not be required to evaluate the response. On the other hand if the performance of the aim is seemingly directly proportional or directly related to the feedback it would be advisable to use a certain quantitative model for the purpose1.
Most of the Quantitative models are based on the assumptions that are simple and not too intricate at all. It is also observed that most of the most quantitative funds managers hold on to the ground rules of contemporary group theory. The fundamental concepts of this issue consist of the capital asset pricing model also famously known as the CAPM model , the Central Value Theory by the famous Graham & Dodd who also named the model after them , the