Free CFA Institute CFA-Level-III Exam Questions

Geneva Management (GenM) selects long-only and long-short portfolio managers to develop asset allocationrecommendations for their institutional clients.GenM Advisor Marcus Reinhart recently examined the holdings of one of GenM's long-only portfolios activelymanaged by Jamison Kiley. Reinhart compiled the holdings for two consecutive non-overlapping five yearperiods. The Morningstar Style Boxes for the two periods for Kiley's portfolio are provided in Exhibits 1 and 2.Exhibit 1: Morningstar Style Box: Long-Only Manager for Five-Year Period 1Exhibit 2: Morningstar Style Box: Long-Only Manager for Five-Year Period 2Reinhart contends that the holdings-based analysis might be flawed because Kiley's portfolio holdings areknown only at the end of each quarter. Portfolio holdings at the end of the reporting period might misrepresentthe portfolio's average composition. To compliment his holdings-based analysis, Reinhart also conducts areturns-based style analysis on Kiley's portfolio. Reinhart selects four benchmarks:1. SCV: a small-cap value index.2. SCG: a small-cap growth index.3. LCV: a large-cap value index.4. LCG: a large-cap growth index.Using the benchmarks, Reinhart obtains the following regression results:Period 1: Rp = 0.02 + H0.01(SCV) + 0.02(SCG) + 0.36(LCV) + 0.61(LCG)Period 2: Rp = 0.02 + 0.01(SCV) + 0.02(SCG) + 0.60(LCV) + 0.38(LCG)Kiley's long-only portfolio is benchmarked against the S&P 500 Index. The Index's current sector allocations areshown in Exhibit 3.Exhibit 3: S&P 500 Index Sector AllocationsGenM strives to select managers whose correlation between forecast alphas and realized alphas has beenfairly high, and to allocate funds across managers in order to achieve alpha and beta separation. GenM givesReinhart a mandate to pursue a core-satellite strategy with a small number of satellites each focusing on arelatively few number of securities.In response to the core-satellite mandate, Reinhart explains that a Completeness Fund approach offers twoadvantages:Advantage 1: The Completeness Fund approach is designed to capture the stock selecting ability of the activemanager, while matching the overall portfolio's risk to its benchmark.Advantage 2: The Completeness Fund approach allows the Fund to fully capture the value added from activemanagers by eliminating misfit risk.Which one of the following statements about Kiley's long-only portfolio is most correct1? Kiley's portfolio:

William Bliss, CFA, runs a hedge fund that uses both managed futures strategies and positions in physicalcommodities. He is reviewing his operations and strategies to increase the return of the fund. Bliss has justhired Joseph Kanter, CFA, to help him manage the fund because he realizes that he needs to increase histrading activity in futures and to engage in futures strategies other than fully hedged, passively managedpositions. Bliss also hired Kanter because of Kantcr's experience with swaps, which Bliss hopes to add to hischoice of investment tools.Bliss explains to Kanter that his clients pay 2% on assets under management and a 20% incentive fee. Theincentive fee is based on profits after having subtracted the risk-free rate, which is the fund's basic hurdle rate,and there is a high water mark provision. Bliss is hoping that Kanter can help his business because his firm didnot earn an incentive fee this past year. This was the case despite the fact that, after two years of losses, thevalue of the fund increased 14% during the previous year. That increase occurred without any new capitalcontributed from clients. Bliss is optimistic about the near future because the term structure of futures prices isparticularly favorable for earning higher returns from long futures positions.Kanter says he has seen research that indicates inflation may increase in the next few years. He states thisshould increase the opportunity to earn a higher return in commodities and suggests taking a large, marginedposition in a broad commodity index. This would offer an enhanced return that would attract investors holdingonly stocks and bonds. Bliss mentions that not all commodity prices are positively correlated with inflation so itmay be better to choose particular types of commodities in which to invest. Furthermore, Bliss adds thatcommodities traditionally have not outperformed stocks and bonds either on a risk-adjusted or absolute basis.Kanter says he will research companies who do business in commodities, because buying the stock of thosecompanies to gain commodity exposure is an efficient and effective method for gaining indirect exposure tocommodities.Bliss agrees that his fund should increase its exposure to commodities and wants Kanter's help in using swapsto gain such exposure. Bliss asks Kanter to enter into a swap with a relatively short horizon to demonstrate howa commodity swap works. Bliss notes that the futures prices of oil for six months, one year, eighteen months,and two years are $55, S54, $52, and $5 1 per barrel, respectively, and the risk-free rate is less than 2%.Bliss asks how a seasonal component could be added to such a swap. Specifically, he asks if either thenotional principal or the swap price can be higher during the reset closest to the winter season and lower for thereset period closest to the summer season. This would allow the swap to more effectively hedge a commoditylike oil, which would have a higher demand in the winter than the summer. Kanter says that a swap can onlyhave seasonal swap prices, and the notional principal must stay constanl. Thus, the solution in such a casewould be to enter into two swaps, one that has an annual reset in the winter and one that has an annual reset inthe summer.Given the information, the most likely reason that Bliss's firm did not earn an incentive fee in the past year wasbecause:

Eugene Price, CFA, a portfolio manager for the American Universal Fund (AUF), has been directed to pursue acontingent immunization strategy for a portfolio with a current market value of $100 million. AUF's trustees arenot willing to accept a rate of return less than 6% over the next five years. The trustees have also stated thatthey believe an immunization rate of 8% is attainable in today's market. Price has decided to implement thisstrategy by initially purchasing $100 million in 10-year bonds with an annual coupon rate of 8.0%, paidsemiannually.Price forecasts that the prevailing immunization rate and market rate for the bonds will both rise from 8% to 9%in one year.While Price is conducting his immunization strategy he is approached by April Banks, a newly hired junioranalyst at AUF. Banks is wondering what steps need to be taken to immunize a portfolio with multiple liabilities.Price states that the concept of single liability immunization can fortunately be extended to address the issue ofimmunizing a portfolio with multiple liabilities. He further states that there are two methods for managingmultiple liabilities. The first method is cash flow matching which involves finding a bond with a maturity dateequal to the liability payment date, buying enough in par value of that bond so that the principal and final couponfully fund the last liability, and continuing this process until all liabilities are matched. The second method ishorizon matching which ensures that the assets and liabilities have the same present values and durations.Price warns Banks about the dangers of immunization risk. He states that it is impossible to have a portfoliowith zero immunization risk, because reinvestment risk will always be present. Price tells Banks, "Be cognizantof the dispersion of cash flows when conducting an immunization strategy. When there is a high dispersion ofcash flows about the horizon date, immunization risk is high. It is better to have cash flows concentrated aroundthe investment horizon, since immunization risk is reduced."Assuming an immediate (today) increase in the immunized rate to 11%, the portfolio required return that wouldmost likely make Price turn to an immunization strategy is closest to:

John Rawlins is a bond portfolio manager for Waimea Management, a U.S.-based portfolio management firm. Waimea specializes in the management of equity and fixed income portfolios for large institutional investors such as pension funds, insurance companies, and endowments. Rawlins uses bond futures contracts for both hedging and speculative positions. He frequently uses futures contracts for tactical asset allocation because, relative to cash instruments, futures have lower transactions costs and margin requirements. They also allow for short positions and longer duration positions not available with cash market instruments. Rawlins has a total of approximately $750 million of assets under management. In one of his client portfolios, Rawlins currently holds the following positions:The dollar duration of the cheapest to deliver bond (CTD) is $10,596.40 and the conversion factor is 1.3698.In a discussion of this bond hedge, Rawlins confers with John Tejada, his assistant. Tejada states that he hasregressed the corporate bond's yield against the yield for the CTD and has found that the slope coefficient forthis regression is 1.0. He states his results confirm the assumptions made by Rawlins for his hedgingcalculations. Rawlins states that had Tejada found a slope coefficient greater than one, the number of futurescontracts needed to hedge a position would decrease (relative to the regression coefficient being equal to one).In addition to hedging specific bond positions, Rawlins tends to be quite active in individual bond managementby moving in and out of specific issues to take advantage of temporary mispricing. Although the turnover in hisportfolio is sometimes quite high, he believes that by using his gut instincts he can outperform a buy-and-holdstrategy. Tejada on the other hand prefers using statistical software and simulation to help him find undervaluedbond issues. Although Tejada has recently graduated from a prestigious university with a master's degree infinance, Rawlins has not given Tejada full rein in decision-making because he believes that Tejada's approachneeds further evaluation over a period of both falling and rising interest rates, as well as in different creditenvironments.Rawlins and Tejada are evaluating two individual bonds for purchase. The first bond was issued by Dynacom, aU.S. telecommunications firm. This bond is denominated in dollars. The second bond was issued by BergamoMetals, an Italian based mining and metal fabrication firm. The Bergamo bond is denominated in euros. Theholding period for either bond is three months.The characteristics of the bonds are as follows:3-month cash interest rates are 1% in the United States and 2.5% in the European Union. Rawlins and Tejadawill hedge the receipt of euro interest and principal from the Bergamo bond using a forward contract on euros.Rawlins evaluates these two bonds and decides that over the next three months, he will invest in the Dynacombond. He notes that although (he Bergamo bond has a yield advantage of 1% over the next quarter, the euro isat a three month forward discount of approximately 1.5%. Therefore, he favors the Dynacom bond because thenet return advantage for the Dynacom bond is 0.5% over the next three months.Tejada does his own analysis and states that, although he agrees with Rawlins that the Dynacom bond has ayield advantage, he is concerned about the credit quality of the Dynacom bond. Specifically, he has heardrumors that the chief executive and the chairman of the board at Dynacom are both being investigated by theU.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for possible manipulation of Dynacom's stock price, just prior to theexercise of their options in the firm's stock. He believes that the resulting fallout from this alleged incident couldbe damaging to Dynacom's bond price.Tejada analyzes the potential impact on Dynacom's bond price using breakeven analysis. He believes thatnews of the incident could increase the yield on Dynacom's bond by 0.75%. Under this scenario, he states thathe would favor the Bergamo bond over the next three months, assuming that the yield on the Bergamo bondstays constant. Rawlins reviews Tejada's breakeven analysis and states that though he is appreciative ofTejada's efforts, the analysis relies on an approximation.Suppose that the original dollar duration for a 100 basis point change in interest rates was $4,901,106 and thatthe bond prices remain constant during the year. Based upon the durations one year from today, and assuminga proportionate investment in each of the three bonds, the amount of cash that will need to be invested torestore the average dollar duration to the original level is closest to:

Albert Wulf, CFA, is a portfolio manager with Upsala Asset Management, a regional financial services firm thathandles investments for small businesses in Northern Germany. For the most part, Wulf has been handlinglocally concentrated investments in European securities. Due to a lack of expertise in currency management heworks closely with James Bauer, a foreign exchange expert who manages international exposure in some ofUpsala's portfolios. Both individuals are committed to managing portfolio assets within the guidelines of clientinvestment policy statements.To achieve global diversification, Wulf's portfolio invests in securities from developed nations including theUnited States, Japan, and Great Britain. Due to recent currency market turmoil, translation risk has become ahuge concern for Upsala's managers. The U.S. dollar has recently plummeted relative to the euro, while theJapanese yen and British pound have appreciated slightly relative to the euro. Wulf and Bauer meet to discusshedging strategies that will hopefully mitigate some of the concerns regarding future currency fluctuations.Wulf currently has a $1,000,000 investment in a U.S. oil and gas corporation. This position was taken with theexpectation that demand for oil in the U.S. would increase sharply over the short-run. Wulf plans to exit thisposition 125 days from today. In order to hedge the currency exposure to the U.S. dollar, Bauer enters into a90-day U.S. dollar futures contract, expiring in September. Bauer comments to Wulf that this futures contractguarantees that the portfolio will not take any unjustified risk in the volatile dollar.Wulf recently started investing in securities from Japan. He has been particularly interested in the growth oftechnology firms in that country. Wulf decides to make an investment of ¥25,000,000 in a small technologyenterprise that is in need of start-up capital. The spot exchange rate for the Japanese yen at the time of theinvestment is ¥135/€. The expected spot rate in 90 days is ¥132/€. Given the expected appreciation of the yen,Bauer purchases put options that provide insurance against any deprecation of the euro. While delta-hedgingthis position, Bauer discovers that current at-the-money yen put options sell for €1 with a delta of -0.85. Hementions to Wulf that, in general, put options will provide a cheaper alternative to hedging than with futuressince put options are only exercised if the local currency depreciates.The exposure of Wulf’s portfolio to the British pound results from a 180-day pound-denominated investment of£5,000,000. The spot exchange rate for the British pound is £0.78/€. The value of the investment is expected toincrease to £5,100,000 at the end of the 180 day period. Bauer informs Wulf that due to the minimal expectedexchange rate movement, it would be in the best interest of their clients, from a cost-benefit standpoint, tohedge only the principal of this investment.Before entering into currency futures and options contracts, Wulf and Bauer discuss the possibility of alsohedging market risk due to changes in the value of the assets. Bauer suggests that in order to hedge against apossible loss in the value of an asset Wulf should short a given foreign market index. Wulf is interested inexecuting index hedging strategies that are perfectly correlated with foreign investments. Bauer, however,cautions Wulf regarding the increase in trading costs that would result from these additional hedging activities.Regarding the Japanese investment in the technology company, determine the appropriate transaction in putoptions to adjust the current delta hedge, given that the delta changes to -0.92. Assume that each yen putallows the right to self ¥1,000,000.