<p><strong>Background </strong>The stocksaving has during the last century increased and become more popular in Sweden and during the last 20 years the number of Swedes who save in stocks has more than doubled. While the interest in stocksaving has increased so has the interest in private saving. Today there is a group of people who live of the income which is generated from the stockmarket, they are called “Daytraders” and they do “Daytrading”.  They constantly observe the stockmarket and act as soon as new information that can affect the stockrate is revealed. And then there is also a group which makes purchases a few times a week or more seldom.</p><p> </p><p>The valuationmodels have through time changed and there are several models to choose from. The models are built by many complex assumptions that can affect the outcome of the valuation.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Purpose </strong>The purpose of this essay is to examine which of the theoretical stockvaluationmodels are used in private saving, and to find the reasons for the choice of model. In cases when the stockvaluationmodels are not used as a main valuationmodel a part of the purpose is also to find other factors that can affect the outcome of the valuation.</p><p> </p><p><strong>Method </strong>Based on the purpose the choice was made to use a qualitative method with personal interviews as a tool. The choice of method and tool was based on that depth information was needed to fulfill the purpose. My examination comprises five persons who do private saving in stocks. Their activity on the stockmarket varies, meaning that some buy more frequently and some more seldom. </p><p> </p><p><strong>Result</strong> The result of my examination shows that several of the theoretical stockvaluationmodels are not used in private saving, there are only two models that the privatesavers actually use. There are mainly three arguments to why the theoretical stockvaluationmodels are not used in private saving. The first argument is that the responders consider several models not to be motivating, they are not relevant. The second argument is that some of the models are considered to complicated and the third argument is that in many cases there is a lack of useable data.</p><p></p>

Background The stocksaving has during the last century increased and become more popular in Sweden and during the last 20 years the number of Swedes who save in stocks has more than doubled. While the interest in stocksaving has increased so has the interest in private saving. Today there is a group of people who live of the income which is generated from the stockmarket, they are called “Daytraders” and they do “Daytrading”.  They constantly observe the stockmarket and act as soon as new information that can affect the stockrate is revealed. And then there is also a group which makes purchases a few times a week or more seldom.   The valuationmodels have through time changed and there are several models to choose from. The models are built by many complex assumptions that can affect the outcome of the valuation.   Purpose The purpose of this essay is to examine which of the theoretical stockvaluationmodels are used in private saving, and to find the reasons for the choice of model. In cases when the stockvaluationmodels are not used as a main valuationmodel a part of the purpose is also to find other factors that can affect the outcome of the valuation.   Method Based on the purpose the choice was made to use a qualitative method with personal interviews as a tool. The choice of method and tool was based on that depth information was needed to fulfill the purpose. My examination comprises five persons who do private saving in stocks. Their activity on the stockmarket varies, meaning that some buy more frequently and some more seldom.    Result The result of my examination shows that several of the theoretical stockvaluationmodels are not used in private saving, there are only two models that the privatesavers actually use. There are mainly three arguments to why the theoretical stockvaluationmodels are not used in private saving. The first argument is that the responders consider several models not to be motivating, they are not relevant. The second argument is that some of the models are considered to complicated and the third argument is that in many cases there is a lack of useable data.