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:

Jack Higgins, CFA, and Tim Tyler, CFA, are analysts for Integrated Analytics (LA), a U.S.-based investmentanalysis firm. JA provides bond analysis for both individual and institutional portfolio managers throughout theworld. The firm specializes in the valuation of international bonds, with consideration of currency risk. IAtypically uses forward contracts to hedge currency risk.Higgins and Tyler are considering the purchase of a bond issued by a Norwegian petroleum products firm,Bergen Petroleum. They have concerns, however, regarding the strength of the Norwegian krone currency(NKr) in the near term, and they want to investigate the potential return from hedged strategies. Higginssuggests that they consider forward contracts with the same maturity as the investment holding period, which isestimated at one year. He states that if IA expects the Norwegian NKr to depreciate and that the Swedish krona(Sk) to appreciate, then IA should enter into a hedge where they sell Norwegian NKr and buy Swedish Sk via aone-year forward contract. The Swedish Sk could then be converted to dollars at the spot rate in one year.Tyler states that if an investor cannot obtain a forward contract denominated in Norwegian NKr and if theNorwegian NKr and euro are positively correlated, then a forward contract should be entered into where euroswill be exchanged for dollars in one year. Tyler then provides Higgins the following data on risk-free rates andspot rates in Norway and the U.S., as well as the expected return on the Bergen Petroleum bond.Return on Bergen Petroleum bond in Norwegian NKr 7.00%Risk-free rate in Norway 4.80%Expected change in the NKr relative to the U.S. dollar -0.40%Risk-free rate in United States 2.50%Higgins and Tyler discuss the relationship between spot rates and forward rates and comment as follows.• Higgins: "The relationship between spot rates and forward rates is referred to as interest rate parity, wherehigher forward rates imply that a country's spot rate will increase in the future."• Tyler: "Interest rate parity depends on covered interest arbitrage which works as follows. Suppose the 1-yearU.K. interest rate is 5.5%, the 1-year Japanese interest rate is 2.3%, the Japanese yen is at a one-year forwardpremium of 4.1%, and transactions costs are minimal. In this case, the international trader should borrow yen.Invest in pound denominated bonds, and use a yen-pound forward contract to pay back the yen loan."The following day, Higgins and Tyler discuss various emerging market bond strategies and make the followingstatements.• Higgins: "Over time, the quality in emerging market sovereign bonds has declined, due in part to contagionand the competitive devaluations that often accompany crises in emerging markets. When one countrydevalues their currency, others often quickly follow and as a result the countries default on their external debt,which is usually denominated in a hard currency."• Tyler: "Investing outside the index can provide excess returns. Because the most common emerging marketbond index is concentrated in Latin America, the portfolio manager can earn an alpha by investing in emergingcountry bonds outside of this region."Turning their attention to specific issues of bonds, Higgins and Tyler examine the characteristics of two bonds:a six-year maturity bond issued by the Midlothian Corporation and a twelve-year maturity bond issued by theHorgen Corporation. The Midlothian bond is a U.S. issue and the Horgen bond was issued by a firm based inSwitzerland. The characteristics of each bond are shown in the table below. Higgins and Tyler discuss therelative attractiveness of each bond and, using a total return approach, which bond should be invested in,assuming a 1-year time horizon.Which of the following statements provides the best description of the advantage of using breakeven spread analysis? Breakeven spread analysis: 

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:

Milson Investment Advisors (MIA) specializes in managing fixed income portfolios for institutional clients. Manyof MIA's clients are able to take on substantial portfolio risk and therefore the firm's funds invest in all creditqualities and in international markets. Among its investments, MIA currently holds positions in the debt of Worthinc., Enertech Company, and SBK Company.Worth Inc. is a heavy equipment manufacturer in Germany. The company finances a significant amount of itsfixed assets using bonds. Worth's current debt outstanding is in the form of non-callable bonds issued twoyears ago at a coupon rate of 7.2% and a maturity of 15 years. Worth expects German interest rates to declineby as much as 200 basis points (bps) over the next year and would like to take advantage of the decline. Thecompany has decided to enter into a 2-year interest rate swap with semiannual payments, a swap rate of 5.8%,and a floating rate based on 6-month EURIBOR. The duration of the fixed side of the swap is 1.2. Analysts atMIA have made the following comments regarding Worth's swap plan:• "The duration of the swap from the perspective of Worth is 0.95."• "By entering into the swap, the duration of Worth's long-term liabilities will become smaller, causing the valueof the firm's equity to become more sensitive to changes in interest rates."Enertech Company is a U.S.-based provider of electricity and natural gas. The company uses a large proportionof floating rate notes to finance its operations. The current interest rate on Enertech's floating rate notes, basedon 6-month LIBOR plus 150bp, is 5.5%. To hedge its interest rate risk, Enertech has decided to enter into along interest rate collar. The cap and the floor of the collar have maturities of two years, with settlement dates(in arrears) every six months. The strike rate for the cap is 5.5% and for the floor is 4.5%, based on 6-monthLIBOR, which is forecast to be 5.2%, 6.1%, 4.1%, and 3.8%, in 6,12, 18, and 24 months, respectively. Eachsettlement period consists of 180 days. Analysts at MIA are interested in assessing the attributes of the collar.SBK Company builds oil tankers and other large ships in Norway. The firm has several long-term bond issuesoutstanding with fixed interest rates ranging from 5.0% to 7.5% and maturities ranging from 5 to 12 years.Several years ago, SBK took the pay floating side of a semi-annual settlement swap with a rate of 6.0%, afloating rate based on LIBOR, and a tenor of eight years. The firm now believes interest rates may increase in 6months, but is not 100% confident in this assumption. To hedge the risk of an interest rate increase, given itsinterest rate uncertainty, the firm has sold a payer interest rate swaption with a maturity of 6 months, anunderlying swap rate of 6.0%, and a floating rate based on LIBOR.MIA is considering investing in the debt of Rio Corp, a Brazilian energy company. The investment would be inRio's floating rate notes, currently paying a coupon of 8.0%. MIA's economists are forecasting an interest ratedecline in Brazil over the short term.Determine whether the MIA analysts' comments regarding the duration of the Worth Inc. swap and the effectsof the swap on the company's balance sheet are correct or incorrect.

Daniel Castillo and Ramon Diaz are chief investment officers at Advanced Advisors (AA), a boutique fixedincome firm based in the United States. AA employs numerous quantitative models to invest in both domesticand international securities.During the week, Castillo and Diaz consult with one of their investors, Sally Michaels. Michaels currently holds a$10,000,000 fixed-income position that is selling at par. The maturity is 20 years, and the coupon rate of 7% ispaid semiannually. Her coupons can be reinvested at 8%. Castillo is looking at various interest rate changescenarios, and one such scenario is where the interest rate on the bonds immediately changes to 8%.Diaz is considering using a repurchase agreement to leverage Michaels's portfolio. Michaels is concerned,however, with not understanding the factors that impact the interest rate, or repo rate, used in her strategy. Inresponse, Castillo explains the factors that affect the repo rate and makes the following statements:1. "The repo rate is directly related to the maturity of the repo, inversely related to the quality of the collateral,and directly related to the maturity of the collateral. U.S. Treasury bills are often purchased by Treasury dealersusing repo transactions, and since they have high liquidity, short maturities, and no default risk, the repo rate isusually quite low. "2. "The greater control the lender has over the collateral, the lower the repo rate. If the availability of thecollateral is limited, the repo rate will be higher."Castillo consults with an institutional investor, the Washington Investment Fund, on the effect of leverage onbond portfolio returns as well as their bond portfolio's sensitivity to changes in interest rates. The portfolio underdiscussion is well diversified, with small positions in a large number of bonds. It has a duration of 7.2. Of the$200 million value of the portfolio, $60 million was borrowed. The duration of borrowed funds is 0.8. Theexpected return on the portfolio is 8% and the cost of borrowed funds is 3%.The next day, the chief investment officer for the Washington Investment Fund expresses her concern aboutthe risk of their portfolio, given its leverage. She inquires about the various risk measures for bond portfolios. Inresponse, Diaz distinguishes between the standard deviation and downside risk measures, making thefollowing statements:1. ''Portfolio managers complain that using variance to calculate Sharpe ratios is inappropriate. Since itconsiders all returns over the entire distribution, variance and the resulting standard deviation are artificiallyinflated, so the resulting Sharpe ratio is artificially deflated. Since it is easily calculated for bond portfolios,managers feci a more realistic measure of risk is the semi-variance, which measures the distribution of returnsbelow a given return, such as the mean or a hurdle rate."2. "A shortcoming of VAR is its inability to predict the size of potential losses in the lower tail of the expectedreturn distribution. Although it can assign a probability to some maximum loss, it does not predict the actual lossif the maximum loss is exceeded. If Washington Investment Fund is worried about catastrophic loss, shortfallrisk is a more appropriate measure, because it provides the probability of not meeting a target return."AA has a corporate client, Shaifer Materials with a €20,000,000 bond outstanding that pays an annual fixedcoupon rate of 9.5% with a 5-year maturity. Castillo believes that euro interest rates may decrease further withinthe next year below the coupon rate on the fixed rate bond. Castillo would like Shaifer to issue new debt at alower euro interest rate in the future. Castillo has, however, looked into the costs of calling the bonds and hasfound that the call premium is quite high and that the investment banking costs of issuing new floating rate debtwould be quite steep. As such he is considering using a swaption to create a synthetic refinancing of the bondat a lower cost than an actual refinancing of the bond. He states that in order to do so, Shaifer should buy apayer swaption, which would give them the option to pay a lower floating interest rate if rates drop.Diaz retrieves current market data for payer and receiver swaptions with a maturity of one year. The terms ofeach instrument are provided below:Payer swaption fixed rate7.90%Receiver swaption fixed rate7.60%Current Euribor7.20%Projected Euribor in one year5.90%Diaz states that, assuming Castillo is correct, Shaifer can exercise a swaption in one year to effectively call intheir old fixed rate euro debt paying 9.5% and refinance at a floating rate, which would be 7.5% in one year.Regarding their statements concerning the synthetic refinancing of the Shaifer Materials fixed rate euro debt,are the comments correct?