Free CFA Institute CFA-Level-III Exam Questions

Mark Stober, William Robertson, and James McGuire are consultants for a regional pension consultancy. One of their clients, Richard Smitherspoon, chief investment officer of Quality Car Part Manufacturing, recently attended a conference on risk management topics for pension plans. Smitherspoon is a conservative manager who prefers to follow a long-term investment strategy with little portfolio turnover. Smitherspoon has substantial experience in managing a defined benefit plan but has little experience with risk management issues. Smitherspoon decides to discuss how Quality can begin implementing risk management techniques with Stober, Robertson, and McGuire. Quality's risk exposure is evaluated on a quarterly basis. Before implementing risk management techniques, Smitherspoon expresses confusion regarding some measures of risk management. "I know beta and standard deviation, but what is all this stuff about convexity, delta, gamma, and vega?" Stober informs Smitherspoon that delta is the first derivative of the call-stock price curve, and Robertson adds that gamma is the relationship between how bond prices change with changing time to maturity. Smitherspoon is still curious about risk management techniques, and in particular the concept of VAR. He asks, "What does a daily 5% VAR of $5 million mean? I just get so confused with whether VAR is a measure of maximum or minimum loss. Just last month, the consultant from MinRisk, a competing consulting firm, told me it was ‘a measure of maximum loss, which in your case means we are 95% confident that the maximum 1-day loss is $5.0 million." McGuire states that his definition of VAR is that "VAR is a measure that combines probabilities over a certain time horizon with dollar amounts, which in your case means that one expects to lose a minimum $5 million five trading days out of every 100." Smitherspoon expresses bewilderment at the different methods for determining VAR. "Can't you risk management types formulate a method that works like calculating a beta? It would be so easy if there were a method that allowed one to just use mean and standard deviation. I need a VAR that I can get my arms around." The next week, Stober visits the headquarters of TopTech, a communications firm. Their CFO is Ralph Long, who prefers to manage the firm's pension himself because he believes he can time the market and spot upcoming trends before analysts can. Long also believes that risk measurement for TopTech can be evaluated annually because of his close attention to the portfolio. Stober calculates TopTech's 95% surplus at risk to be S500 million for an annual horizon. The expected return on TopTech's asset base (currently at S2 billion) is 5%. The plan has a surplus of $100 million. Stober uses a 5% probability level to calculate the minimum amount by which the plan will be underfunded next year. Of the following VAR calculation methods, the measure that would most likely suit Smitherspoon is the:

Andre Hickock, CFA, is a newly hired fixed income portfolio manager for Deadwood Investments, LLC. Hickockis reviewing the portfolios of several pension clients that have been assigned to him to manage. The firstportfolio, Montana Hardware, Inc., has the characteristics shown in Figure 1.Hickock is attempting to assess the risk of the Montana Hardware portfolio. The benchmark bond index thatDeadwood uses for pension accounts similar to Montana Hardware has an effective duration of 5.25. Hissupervisor, Carla Mity, has discussed bond risk measurement with Hickock. Mity is most familiar with equity riskmeasures, and is not convinced of the validity of duration as a portfolio risk measure. Mity told Hickock, "I havealways believed that standard deviation is the best measure of bond portfolio risk. You want to know thevolatility, and standard deviation is the most direct measure of volatility."Hickock is also reviewing the bond portfolio of Buffalo Sports, Inc., which is comprised of the following assetsshown in Figure 2.The trustees of the Buffalo Sports pension plan have requested that Deadwood explore alternatives to reducethe risk of the MBS sector of their bond portfolio. Hickock responded to their request as follows:"I believe that the current option-adjusted spread (OAS) on the MBS sector is quite high. In order to reduce yourrisk, I would suggest that we hedge the interest rate risk using a combination of 2-year and 10-year Treasurysecurity futures. I would further suggest that we do not take any steps to hedge spread risk at this time."In assessing the risk of a portfolio containing both bullet maturity corporate bonds and MBS, Hickock shouldalways consider that:

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%, paidsemiannuallyPrice 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."Regarding Price's statements on the two methods for managing multiple liabilities, determine whether hisdescriptions of cash flow matching and horizon matching are correct.

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.

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: