开发者:上海品职教育科技有限公司 隐私政策详情

应用版本:4.2.11(IOS)|3.2.5(安卓)APP下载

Lucrecia1004 · 2021年10月05日

从哪里看出B没有violate the duration mandate呢?

NO.PZ2019103001000053

问题如下:

Abram and Edgarton recently attended an investment committee meeting where interest rate expectations for the next 12 months were discussed. The Fund’s mandate allows its duration to fluctuate ±0.30 per year from the benchmark duration. The Fund’s duration is currently equal to its benchmark. Although the Fund is presently invested entirely in annual coupon
sovereign bonds, its investment policy also allows investments in mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and call options on government bond futures. The Fund’s current holdings of on-the-run bonds are presented in Exhibit 1

Over the next 12 months, Abram expects a stable yield curve; however, Edgarton expects a steepening yield curve, with short-term yields rising by 1.00% and long-term yields rising by more than 1.00%.

Based on her yield curve forecast, Abram recommends to her supervisor changes to the Fund’s holdings using the following three strategies:

Strategy 1: Sell the 3-year bonds, and use the proceeds to buy 10-year bonds.

Strategy 2: Sell the 5-year bonds, and use the proceeds to buy 30-year MBS with an effective duration of 4.75.

Strategy 3: Sell the 10-year bonds, and buy call options on 10-year government bond futures.

Based on Exhibit 1 and Abram’s interest rate expectations, which of the following strategies is expected to perform best over the next 12 months?

选项:

A.

Strategy 1

B.

Strategy 2

C.

Strategy 3

解释:

B is correct.

In a stable yield curve environment, holding bonds with higher convexity negatively affects portfolio performance. These bonds have lower yields than bonds with lower convexity, all else being equal. The 5-year US Treasury has higher convexity than the negative convexity 30-year MBS bond. So, by selling the 5-year Treasury and purchasing the 30-year MBS, Abram will reduce the portfolio’s convexity and enhance its yield without violating the duration mandate versus the benchmark.

Abram will reduce the portfolio’s convexity and enhance its yield without violating the duration mandate versus the benchmark.解析中这句话最后一句说的没有violate the duration mandate怎么理解呢?

2 个答案
已采纳答案

pzqa015 · 2021年10月07日

嗨,从没放弃的小努力你好:


strategy 2卖了一只5年期的债券(表1展示modified duration=4.74),买了一个duration为4.75的MBS,通过一买一卖的交易,portfolio的duration基本没变,仍是4.75,所以是没有violate the duration mandate versus benchmark,也就是说portfolio的duration仍可追踪benchmark的duration。

----------------------------------------------
虽然现在很辛苦,但努力过的感觉真的很好,加油!

AL · 2021年10月19日

題目中有有mbs=callable bond 所以用ED 去量嗎

pzqa015 · 2021年10月19日

嗨,从没放弃的小努力你好:


是的

----------------------------------------------
努力的时光都是限量版,加油!

  • 2

    回答
  • 1

    关注
  • 301

    浏览
相关问题

NO.PZ2019103001000053 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 B is correct. In a stable yielcurve environment, holng bon with higher convexity negatively affects portfolio performance. These bon have lower yiel thbon with lower convexity, all else being equal. The 5-yeUS Treasury hhigher convexity ththe negative convexity 30-yeMbon So, selling the 5-yeTreasury anpurchasing the 30-yeMBS, Abrwill rethe portfolio’s convexity anenhanits yielwithout violating the ration mante versus the benchmark. 卖3.0205份3年 买1份10年。他们不就ration netural了吗

2021-06-20 13:44 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2019103001000053 本题如果抛开题目对于ration 变化范围的限制,是不是应该ring the yielcurve 策略是收益最高的,我记得之前学ring the yielcurve时那道题是这么的

2021-05-15 11:44 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2019103001000053 请问老师,有两个问题,请老师帮助看一下理解是否正确 问题一与2相比,不选1的原因是不是(1)不满足ration mat,(2)没有在yielcurve stable的前提下sell convexity进一步增加收益? 问题二1增加的收益是不是等于10年期的YTM-3年期的YTM=2.34-1.4?同理,2增加的收益=2.95-1.8+sell convexity增加的收益率。

2021-03-28 18:04 1 · 回答

请问,1、strategy1卖短期债同时买长期债,是会增加convexity的,对吗?因为长期债期间现金流多于短期债,所以期限长的债券convexity更大。2、为什么说strategy1的本质是ring the yielcurve呢?(其他人提问的答案中这么说的)。strategy1并不是买入长期债持有一段时间后再卖掉,而是同时买卖不同期限债券,债券不同的;ring the yielcurve要求买入和卖出的应该是同一个债券吧。

2021-02-04 12:31 1 · 回答