问题如下：
Campos says that there are better options-based strategies that can exploit market views and reduce hedging costs. She suggests the following strategies
Strategy 1. For AUD exposure, the appropriate strategy is to be long put options at a strike price of 2.1046, short put options with a strike price 2.1356, and short call options with a strike price of 2.1456.
Strategy 2. For CHF exposure, the appropriate strategy is to be long
put options at a strike price of 2.5309, short put options with a strike price
2.5049, and short call options with a strike price of 2.5669.
Is Campos most likely correct that Strategy 1 and Strategy 2 will accomplish the goals of exploiting market views and reducing hedging costs?
选项：
A.No, she is incorrect about reducing hedging costs.
B.Yes.
C.No, she is incorrect about exploiting market views.
解释：
C is correct.
考点：Strategies to Modify Risk and Lower Hedging Costs
解析：Strategy 1和2都没有利用市场观点。Strategy 1，short put options with a strike price 2.1356, 2.1356>2.1046，是一个in the money put option, 会行权，所以不仅不能降低hedging cost，还会支付给对手方一笔钱。Strategy 2，由于BRL/CHF是预测CHF未来升值的（2.5309<2.5642），所以应当long call（而不是long put）options at a strike price of 2.5309。
第一个没有考虑hedge cost，第二个没有考虑mkt view，所以答案有问题啊
