Free Practice Questions for PRMIA 8006 Exam

A 'hard call protection' means the bond cannot be called until a certain date, regardless of what the share price is. Therefore statement I is false. Also note that a 'soft call protection' means that a bond can be called only if the share price reaches a certain threshold.

It is advantageous for the issuer to call its convertible securities when the share price exceeds the conversion price - because these shares can instead be sold in the market at the higher share price than the lower conversion price. Statement II is true.

When the issuer's share price is very high, the convertible bond trades at a discount to the share price because it is almost certain to be called by the issuer and be redeemed at par. Therefore statement III is right. Statement IV is incorrect because convertible bonds need to pay less coupon than equivalent non-convertible bonds because of the value of the option embedded in them.

A short position in a fixed rate bond and a long position in an FRN has the effect of paying fixed and receiving floating. The floating received offsets the floating payment on the borrowing, leaving the borrower with just a fixed rate outflow. Therefore the combination identified in statement I can be used to achieve the objective of paying fixed.

A collar is equivalent to a long position in an interest rate cap combined with a short position in an interest rate floor. This has the effect of setting a range within which the investor's borrowing rate will vary. In the case where the cap and floor rates are the same, the combination of a collar and a long FRN effectively produces an outcome where the holder of such positions pays a fixed rate. Therefore, an interest rate collar can be used to convert the fixed payment to a floating rate payment. [Example: Assume current interest rate is 3%, and therefore the borrower has a liability of 3% on the FRN. Assume that the borrower now buys a collar at the strike rate of 4%. Now the borrower receives 0% (=Max(3 % - 4%, 0)) on the cap part of the collar, and pays 1% on the floor part of the collar (=Max(4% - 3%, 0)). The net borrowing cost therefore is 3% paid on the FRN plus 1% paid on the collar, equal to 4%. Now if interest rates rise to say 6%, the borrower pays 6% on the FRN, and receives 2% from the collar (=Max(6% - 4%, 0) - Max(4% - 6%, 0)), creating a net cost of 6% - 2% = 4%.

A collar is often issued with an FRN to convert floating flows to fixed. Therefore combination II is an acceptable choice.

A short position in a fixed rate bond and a short position in an FRN produces a cash flow that does not produce a net fixed cash outflow when combined with the borrowing. Therefore statement III is not a valid combination.

An interest rate swap where the investor pays fixed and receives floating, when combined with a floating payment on an FRN leaves a net fixed payment, Therefore statement IV is a valid way to achieve the borrower's objective.

The minimum variance hedge ratio is effectively the beta between the asset to be hedged and the asset used as a hedge, calculated as [correlation between the hedge and the asset to be hedged x volatility of the asset to be hedged/volatility of the hedge].The effectiveness of the hedge depends upon the correlation between the two, ie the asset to be hedged and the hedge. The minimum variance hedge ratio can be 1.0 even in situations where the correlation between the asset and the hedge is low, and as such does not mean much unless we know the hedge effectiveness (ie, the correlation).

It is therefore not possible to draw any certain conclusions based on the minimum variance hedge ratio alone. IV therefore is the only correct answer.

The value of a business derives itself from the value of its cash flows, and not its capital structure. However, the availability of tax deductions on debt allow increasing the value of the business to equity holders by using the tax shield.

In the absence of taxes, there is no such advantage. Even if debt is nominally priced lower than the cost of equity, substituting debt for equity makes the remaining equity more risky and increasing the cost of equity to offset any advantage gained from the lower cost of debt. Changing the capital structure does not change the value of the firm, and this in essence is the conclusion of the Modigliani-Miller theorem.

To calculate the Modified Duration from Macaulay's duration, we use the relationship MD = D/(1+r), where MD is the modified duration and D the Macaulay Duration. Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

The coupon payments can be considered an annuity which can be valued using the formula for the PV of annuities= annuity . Therefore the value of the five coupon payments is 5 * ((1-1/(1.06^5))/0.06) = $21.06

Similarly the principal payment at the end of 5 years can be valued as 100/1.065 = $74.73

Therefore the total value of the bond today is $95.79

When assets are uncorrelated, variances are additive. But volatility (which is standard deviation) is not. In the given situation, the total variance of the portfolio will be equal to the the square root of the sum of the variances of the assets in the portfolio weighted by the square of their weights. Its volatility will be the square root of this variance. Thus Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

(This is because V(cA + dB) = c^2 V(A) + d^2 V(B) - refer tutorial on combining variances.)

Choice 'a' is incorrect as it describes the calculation of variance, not volatility. Also, the presence of a large number of uncorrelated assets does not create a portfolio with volatility equal to zero or that of the market. The other choices are therefore incorrect.

The investor's needs to sell futures contracts, as his current position is long. He needs to sell ($1,000,000 x (2.5-1)) / ($240,000 x 1.2) = 5.2 contracts, or rounded to 5 contracts.

It is important to note here that the investor wishes to retain a beta of 1, and does not want to get rid of all market exposure.

A deep out of the money option will not react much to the change in the price of the underlying. In fact, the more out of the money it is, the more unresponsive it will be to changes in the prices of the underlying. Therefore, its delta will approach zero. Since delta is zero, gamma, which measures the rate of change in the delta, will also be zero as delta is unchanging. Therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer.

The most loss the fund manager can bear without facing a margin call is the loss that will make his margin balance account no lower than $4,000. This means he can have a loss of upto $1,000 before a margin call is triggered, implying that prices can fall by $10 per ounce (=$1,000/100 ounces per contract) without triggering a margin call. The margin call will be to top the margin up to the $5,000 initial margin.