Free CFA Institute CFA-Level-III Exam Questions

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:

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:

Carl Cramer is a recent hire at Derivatives Specialists Inc. (DSI), a small consulting firm that advises a varietyof institutions on the management of credit risk. Some of DSI's clients are very familiar with risk managementtechniques whereas others are not. Cramer has been assigned the task of creating a handbook on credit risk,its possible impact, and its management. His immediate supervisor, Christine McNally, will assist Cramer in thecreation of the handbook and will review it. Before she took a position at DSI, McNally advised banks and otherinstitutions on the use of value-at-risk (VAR) as well as credit-at-risk (CAR).Cramer's first task is to address the basic dimensions of credit risk. He states that the first dimension of creditrisk is the probability of an event that will cause a loss. The second dimension of credit risk is the amount lost,which is a function of the dollar amount recovered when a loss event occurs. Cramer recalls the considerabledifficulty he faced when transacting with Johnson Associates, a firm which defaulted on a contract with theGrich Company. Grich forced Johnson Associates into bankruptcy and Johnson Associates was declared indefault of all its agreements. Unfortunately, DSI then had to wait until the bankruptcy court decided on all claimsbefore it could settle the agreement with Johnson Associates.McNally mentions that Cramer should include a statement about the time dimension of credit risk. She statesthat the two primary time dimensions of credit risk are current and future. Current credit risk relates to thepossibility of default on current obligations, while future credit risk relates to potential default on futureobligations. If a borrower defaults and claims bankruptcy, a creditor can file claims representing the face valueof current obligations and the present value of future obligations. Cramer adds that combining current andpotential credit risk analysis provides the firm's total credit risk exposure and that current credit risk is usually areliable predictor of a borrower's potential credit risk.As DSI has clients with a variety of forward contracts, Cramer then addresses the credit risks associated withforward agreements. Cramer states that long forward contracts gain in value when the market price of theunderlying increases above the contract price. McNally encourages Cramer to include an example of credit riskand forward contracts in the handbook. She offers the following:A forward contract sold by Palmer Securities has six months until the delivery date and a contract price of 50.The underlying asset has no cash flows or storage costs and is currently priced at 50. In the contract, no fundswere exchanged upfront.Cramer also describes how a client firm of DSI can control the credit risks in their derivatives transactions. Hewrites that firms can make use of netting arrangements, create a special purpose vehicle, require collateralfrom counterparties, and require a mark-to-market provision. McNally adds that Cramer should include adiscussion of some newer forms of credit protection in his handbook. McNally thinks credit derivativesrepresent an opportunity for DSL She believes that one type of credit derivative that should figure prominently intheir handbook is total return swaps. She asserts that to purchase protection through a total return swap, theholder of a credit asset will agree to pass the total return on the asset to the protection seller (e.g., a swapdealer) in exchange for a single, fixed payment representing the discounted present value of expected cashflows from the asset.A DSI client, Weaver Trading, has a bond that they are concerned will increase in credit risk. Weaver would likeprotection against this event in the form of a payment if the bond's yield spread increases beyond LIBOR plus3%. Weaver Trading prefers a cash settlement.Later that week, Cramer and McNally visit a client's headquarters and discuss the potential hedge of a bondissued by Cuellar Motors. Cuellar manufactures and markets specialty luxury motorcycles. The client isconsidering hedging the bond using a credit spread forward, because he is concerned that a downturn in theeconomy could result in a default on the Cuellar bond. The client holds $2,000,000 in par of the Cuellar bondand the bond's coupons are paid annually. The bond's current spread over the U.S. Treasury rate is 2.5%. Thecharacteristics of the forward contract are shown below.Information on the Credit Spread ForwardDetermine whether the forward contracts sold by Palmer Securities have current and/or potential credit risk.

Sue Gano and Tony Cismesia are performance analysts for the Barth Group. Barth provides consulting andcompliance verification for investment firms wishing to adhere to the Global Investment Performance Standards(GIPS ®). The firm also provides global performance evaluation and attribution services for portfolio managers.Barth recommends the use of GIPS to its clients due to its prominence as the standard for investmentperformance presentation.One of the Barth Group's clients, Nigel Investment Advisors, has a composite that specializes in exploiting theresults of academic research. This Contrarian composite goes long "loser" stocks and short "winner" stocks.The "loser' stocks are those that have experienced severe price declines over the past three years, while the"winner" stocks are those that have had a tremendous surge in price over the past three years. The Contrariancomposite has a mixed record of success and is rather small. It contains only four portfolios. Gano andCismesia debate the requirements for the Contrarian composite under the Global Investment PerformanceStandards.The Global Equity Growth composite of Nigel Investment Advisors invests in growth stocks internationally, andis tilted when appropriate to small cap stocks. One of Nigel's clients in the Global Equity Growth composite isCypress University. The university has recently decided that it would like to implement ethical investing criteriain its endowment holdings. Specifically, Cypress does not want to hold the stocks from any countries that aredeemed as human rights violators. Cypress has notified Nigel of the change, but Nigel does not hold any stocksin these countries. Gano is concerned that this restriction may limit investment manager freedom going forward.Gano and Cismesia are discussing the valuation and return calculation principles for both portfolios andcomposites, which they believe have changed over time. In order to standardize the manner in whichinvestment firms calculate and present performance to clients, Gano states that GIPS require the following:Statement 1: The valuation of portfolios must be based on market values and not book values or cost. Portfoliovaluations must be quarterly for all periods prior to January 1, 2001. Monthly portfolio valuations and returns arerequired for periods between January 1, 2001 and January 1, 2010.Statement 2: Composites are groups of portfolios that represent a specific investment strategy or objective. Adefinition of them must be made available upon request. Because composites are based on portfolio valuation,the monthly requirement for return calculation also applies to composites for periods between January 1, 2001and January 1, 2010.The manager of the Global Equity Growth composite has a benchmark that is fully hedged against currencyrisk. Because the manager is confident in his forecasting of currency values, the manager does not hedge tothe extent that the benchmark does. In addition to the Global Equity Growth composite, Nigel InvestmentAdvisors has a second investment manager that specializes in global equity. The funds under her managementconstitute the Emerging Markets Equity composite. The benchmark for the Emerging Markets Equity compositeis not hedged against currency risk. The manager of the Emerging Markets Equity composite does not hedgedue to the difficulty in finding currency hedges for thinly traded emerging market currencies. The managerfocuses on security selection in these markets and does not try to time the country markets differently from thebenchmark.The manager of the Emerging Markets Equity composite would like to add frontier markets such as Bulgaria,Kenya, Oman, and Vietnam to their composite, with a 20% weight- The manager is attracted to frontier marketsbecause, compared to emerging markets, frontier markets have much higher expected returns and lowercorrelations. Frontier markets, however, also have lower liquidity and higher risk. As a result, the managerproposes that the benchmark be changed from one reflecting only emerging markets to one that reflects bothemerging and frontier markets. The date of the change and the reason for the change will be provided in thefootnotes to the performance presentation. The manager reasons that by doing so, the potential investor canaccurately assess the relative performance of the composite over time.Cismesia would like to explore the performance of the Emerging Markets Equity composite over the past twoyears. To do so, he determines the excess return each period and then compounds the excess return over thetwo years to arrive at a total two-year excess return. For the attribution analysis, he calculates the securityselection effect, the market allocation effect, and the currency allocation effect each year. He then adds all theyearly security selection effects together to arrive at the total security selection effect. He repeats this processfor the market allocation effect and the currency allocation effect.What are the GIPS requirements for the Contrarian composite of Nigel Investment Advisors?

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.