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

lilalila1990 · 2023年03月21日

请问考试时需要列出计算过程吗?还是直接写每种资产的return

NO.PZ2019100901000007

问题如下:

Azarov’s second meeting is with John Spintop, chief investment officer of the Wolf University Endowment Fund (the Fund). Spintop hired Westcome to assist in developing a new investment policy to present to the Fund’s board of directors. The Fund, which has assets under management of $200 million, has an overall objective of maintaining long-term purchasing power while providing needed financial support to Wolf University. During the meeting, Spintop states that the Fund has an annual spending policy of paying out 4% of the Fund’s three-year rolling asset value to Wolf University, and the Fund’s risk tolerance should consider the following three liability characteristics:

The Fund has a small investment staff with limited experience in managing alternative assets and currently uses the Norway model for its investment approach. Azarov suggests a change in investment approach by making an allocation to externally managed alternative assets—namely, hedge funds and private equity. Ten-year nominal expected return assumptions for various asset classes, as well as three proposed allocations that include some allocation to alternative assets, are presented in Exhibit 1.

Expected inflation for the next 10 years is 2.5% annually.

Which proposed allocation in Exhibit 1 would be most appropriate for the Fund given its characteristics?

选项:

A.

Allocation 1

B.

Allocation 2

C.

Allocation 3

解释:

C is correct.

Allocation 3 is the most appropriate allocation for the Fund. The annual expected returns for the three allocations are as follows:

Allocation 1 exp. return = (0.45 × 4.1%) + (0.40 × 6.3%) + (0.10 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 9.1%)= 5.57%.

Allocation 2 exp. return = (0.10 × 4.1%) + (0.15 × 6.3%) + (0.15 × 7.5%) + (0.30 × 5.0%) + (0.30 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.

Allocation 3 exp. return = (0.13 × 4.1%) + (0.32 × 6.3%) + (0.40 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 5.0%) + (0.10 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.

The real return for Allocation 1 is 3.07% (= 5.57% – 2.50%), and the real return for Allocation 2 and Allocation 3 is 4.21% (= 6.71% – 2.50%).

Therefore, Allocation 1 is not appropriate because the expected real rate of return is less than the annual spending rate of 4%. With expected spending at 4%, the purchasing power of the Fund would be expected to decline over time with Allocation 1.

Allocations 2 and 3 both offer an expected real rate of return greater than the annual spending rate of 4%. Thus, the purchasing power of the Fund would be expected to grow over time with either allocation. However, Allocation 3 is more appropriate than Allocation 2 because of its lower allocation to alternative assets (hedge funds and private equity). The total 60% allocation to alternative assets in Allocation 2 is well above the 15% allocation in Allocation 3 and is likely too high considering the Fund’s small investment staff and its limited experience with managing alternative investments. Also, given the Fund’s relatively small size of assets under management ($200 million), access to top hedge funds and private equity managers is likely to be limited.

请问考试时需要列出计算过程吗?还是直接写每种资产的return

1 个答案

lynn_品职助教 · 2023年03月22日

嗨,努力学习的PZer你好:


公式和计算过程都可以写,但是我们要注意时间,三级答题的时间还是很紧张的。


协会明确说了,答案正确是不看过程的。所以同学在考前可以多加练习,看看自己答题速度适不适合列过程。


这里提供我的经历作为参考,我是没有打字母的公式,直接列了数字的计算过程,并且写了答案,解答完所有题目离交卷还有2分钟。

----------------------------------------------
就算太阳没有迎着我们而来,我们正在朝着它而去,加油!

  • 1

    回答
  • 1

    关注
  • 230

    浏览
相关问题

NO.PZ2019100901000007 问题如下 Azarov’s seconmeeting is with John Spintop, chief investment officer of the Wolf University Enwment Fun(the Fun. Spintop hireWestcome to assist in veloping a new investment polito present to the Funs boarof rectors. The Fun whihassets unr management of $200 million, hoverall objective of maintaining long-term purchasing power while proving neefinancisupport to Wolf University. ring the meeting, Spintop states ththe Funhannuspenng poliof paying out 4% of the Funs three-yerolling asset value to Wolf University, anthe Funs risk toleranshoulconsir the following three liability characteristics:The Funha small investment staff with limiteexperienin managing alternative assets ancurrently uses the Norwmol for its investment approach. Azarov suggests a change in investment approamaking allocation to externally managealternative assets—namely, hee fun anprivate equity. Ten-yenominexpectereturn assumptions for various asset classes, well three proposeallocations thinclu some allocation to alternative assets, are presentein Exhibit 1.Expecteinflation for the next 10 years is 2.5% annually.Whiproposeallocation in Exhibit 1 woulmost appropriate for the Fungiven its characteristics? A.Allocation 1 B.Allocation 2 C.Allocation 3 C is correct. Allocation 3 is the most appropriate allocation for the Fun The annuexpectereturns for the three allocations are follows:Allocation 1 exp. return = (0.45 × 4.1%) + (0.40 × 6.3%) + (0.10 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 9.1%)= 5.57%.Allocation 2 exp. return = (0.10 × 4.1%) + (0.15 × 6.3%) + (0.15 × 7.5%) + (0.30 × 5.0%) + (0.30 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.Allocation 3 exp. return = (0.13 × 4.1%) + (0.32 × 6.3%) + (0.40 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 5.0%) + (0.10 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.The rereturn for Allocation 1 is 3.07% (= 5.57% – 2.50%), anthe rereturn for Allocation 2 anAllocation 3 is 4.21% (= 6.71% – 2.50%).Therefore, Allocation 1 is not appropriate because the expectererate of return is less ththe annuspenng rate of 4%. With expectespenng 4%, the purchasing power of the Funwoulexpecteto cline over time with Allocation 1.Allocations 2 an3 both offer expectererate of return greater ththe annuspenng rate of 4%. Thus, the purchasing power of the Funwoulexpecteto grow over time with either allocation. However, Allocation 3 is more appropriate thAllocation 2 because of its lower allocation to alternative assets (hee fun anprivate equity). The tot60% allocation to alternative assets in Allocation 2 is well above the 15% allocation in Allocation 3 anis likely too high consiring the Funs small investment staff anits limiteexperienwith managing alternative investments. Also, given the Funs relatively small size of assets unr management ($200 million), access to top hee fun anprivate equity managers is likely to limite 如题

2024-04-22 23:15 2 · 回答

NO.PZ2019100901000007 问题如下 Azarov’s seconmeeting is with John Spintop, chief investment officer of the Wolf University Enwment Fun(the Fun. Spintop hireWestcome to assist in veloping a new investment polito present to the Funs boarof rectors. The Fun whihassets unr management of $200 million, hoverall objective of maintaining long-term purchasing power while proving neefinancisupport to Wolf University. ring the meeting, Spintop states ththe Funhannuspenng poliof paying out 4% of the Funs three-yerolling asset value to Wolf University, anthe Funs risk toleranshoulconsir the following three liability characteristics:The Funha small investment staff with limiteexperienin managing alternative assets ancurrently uses the Norwmol for its investment approach. Azarov suggests a change in investment approamaking allocation to externally managealternative assets—namely, hee fun anprivate equity. Ten-yenominexpectereturn assumptions for various asset classes, well three proposeallocations thinclu some allocation to alternative assets, are presentein Exhibit 1.Expecteinflation for the next 10 years is 2.5% annually.Whiproposeallocation in Exhibit 1 woulmost appropriate for the Fungiven its characteristics? A.Allocation 1 B.Allocation 2 C.Allocation 3 C is correct. Allocation 3 is the most appropriate allocation for the Fun The annuexpectereturns for the three allocations are follows:Allocation 1 exp. return = (0.45 × 4.1%) + (0.40 × 6.3%) + (0.10 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 9.1%)= 5.57%.Allocation 2 exp. return = (0.10 × 4.1%) + (0.15 × 6.3%) + (0.15 × 7.5%) + (0.30 × 5.0%) + (0.30 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.Allocation 3 exp. return = (0.13 × 4.1%) + (0.32 × 6.3%) + (0.40 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 5.0%) + (0.10 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.The rereturn for Allocation 1 is 3.07% (= 5.57% – 2.50%), anthe rereturn for Allocation 2 anAllocation 3 is 4.21% (= 6.71% – 2.50%).Therefore, Allocation 1 is not appropriate because the expectererate of return is less ththe annuspenng rate of 4%. With expectespenng 4%, the purchasing power of the Funwoulexpecteto cline over time with Allocation 1.Allocations 2 an3 both offer expectererate of return greater ththe annuspenng rate of 4%. Thus, the purchasing power of the Funwoulexpecteto grow over time with either allocation. However, Allocation 3 is more appropriate thAllocation 2 because of its lower allocation to alternative assets (hee fun anprivate equity). The tot60% allocation to alternative assets in Allocation 2 is well above the 15% allocation in Allocation 3 anis likely too high consiring the Funs small investment staff anits limiteexperienwith managing alternative investments. Also, given the Funs relatively small size of assets unr management ($200 million), access to top hee fun anprivate equity managers is likely to limite Norway模型不是主要投equity和FI吗

2022-09-19 06:26 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2019100901000007 问题如下 Azarov’s seconmeeting is with John Spintop, chief investment officer of the Wolf University Enwment Fun(the Fun. Spintop hireWestcome to assist in veloping a new investment polito present to the Funs boarof rectors. The Fun whihassets unr management of $200 million, hoverall objective of maintaining long-term purchasing power while proving neefinancisupport to Wolf University. ring the meeting, Spintop states ththe Funhannuspenng poliof paying out 4% of the Funs three-yerolling asset value to Wolf University, anthe Funs risk toleranshoulconsir the following three liability characteristics:The Funha small investment staff with limiteexperienin managing alternative assets ancurrently uses the Norwmol for its investment approach. Azarov suggests a change in investment approamaking allocation to externally managealternative assets—namely, hee fun anprivate equity. Ten-yenominexpectereturn assumptions for various asset classes, well three proposeallocations thinclu some allocation to alternative assets, are presentein Exhibit 1.Expecteinflation for the next 10 years is 2.5% annually.Whiproposeallocation in Exhibit 1 woulmost appropriate for the Fungiven its characteristics? A.Allocation 1 B.Allocation 2 C.Allocation 3 C is correct. Allocation 3 is the most appropriate allocation for the Fun The annuexpectereturns for the three allocations are follows:Allocation 1 exp. return = (0.45 × 4.1%) + (0.40 × 6.3%) + (0.10 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 9.1%)= 5.57%.Allocation 2 exp. return = (0.10 × 4.1%) + (0.15 × 6.3%) + (0.15 × 7.5%) + (0.30 × 5.0%) + (0.30 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.Allocation 3 exp. return = (0.13 × 4.1%) + (0.32 × 6.3%) + (0.40 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 5.0%) + (0.10 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.The rereturn for Allocation 1 is 3.07% (= 5.57% – 2.50%), anthe rereturn for Allocation 2 anAllocation 3 is 4.21% (= 6.71% – 2.50%).Therefore, Allocation 1 is not appropriate because the expectererate of return is less ththe annuspenng rate of 4%. With expectespenng 4%, the purchasing power of the Funwoulexpecteto cline over time with Allocation 1.Allocations 2 an3 both offer expectererate of return greater ththe annuspenng rate of 4%. Thus, the purchasing power of the Funwoulexpecteto grow over time with either allocation. However, Allocation 3 is more appropriate thAllocation 2 because of its lower allocation to alternative assets (hee fun anprivate equity). The tot60% allocation to alternative assets in Allocation 2 is well above the 15% allocation in Allocation 3 anis likely too high consiring the Funs small investment staff anits limiteexperienwith managing alternative investments. Also, given the Funs relatively small size of assets unr management ($200 million), access to top hee fun anprivate equity managers is likely to limite the annuspenng rate of 4%一般题目给的spenng rate都是respenng rate吗?

2022-09-01 17:17 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2019100901000007 问题如下 Azarov’s seconmeeting is with John Spintop, chief investment officer of the Wolf University Enwment Fun(the Fun. Spintop hireWestcome to assist in veloping a new investment polito present to the Funs boarof rectors. The Fun whihassets unr management of $200 million, hoverall objective of maintaining long-term purchasing power while proving neefinancisupport to Wolf University. ring the meeting, Spintop states ththe Funhannuspenng poliof paying out 4% of the Funs three-yerolling asset value to Wolf University, anthe Funs risk toleranshoulconsir the following three liability characteristics:The Funha small investment staff with limiteexperienin managing alternative assets ancurrently uses the Norwmol for its investment approach. Azarov suggests a change in investment approamaking allocation to externally managealternative assets—namely, hee fun anprivate equity. Ten-yenominexpectereturn assumptions for various asset classes, well three proposeallocations thinclu some allocation to alternative assets, are presentein Exhibit 1.Expecteinflation for the next 10 years is 2.5% annually.Whiproposeallocation in Exhibit 1 woulmost appropriate for the Fungiven its characteristics? A.Allocation 1 B.Allocation 2 C.Allocation 3 C is correct. Allocation 3 is the most appropriate allocation for the Fun The annuexpectereturns for the three allocations are follows:Allocation 1 exp. return = (0.45 × 4.1%) + (0.40 × 6.3%) + (0.10 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 9.1%)= 5.57%.Allocation 2 exp. return = (0.10 × 4.1%) + (0.15 × 6.3%) + (0.15 × 7.5%) + (0.30 × 5.0%) + (0.30 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.Allocation 3 exp. return = (0.13 × 4.1%) + (0.32 × 6.3%) + (0.40 × 7.5%) + (0.05 × 5.0%) + (0.10 × 9.1%)= 6.71%.The rereturn for Allocation 1 is 3.07% (= 5.57% – 2.50%), anthe rereturn for Allocation 2 anAllocation 3 is 4.21% (= 6.71% – 2.50%).Therefore, Allocation 1 is not appropriate because the expectererate of return is less ththe annuspenng rate of 4%. With expectespenng 4%, the purchasing power of the Funwoulexpecteto cline over time with Allocation 1.Allocations 2 an3 both offer expectererate of return greater ththe annuspenng rate of 4%. Thus, the purchasing power of the Funwoulexpecteto grow over time with either allocation. However, Allocation 3 is more appropriate thAllocation 2 because of its lower allocation to alternative assets (hee fun anprivate equity). The tot60% allocation to alternative assets in Allocation 2 is well above the 15% allocation in Allocation 3 anis likely too high consiring the Funs small investment staff anits limiteexperienwith managing alternative investments. Also, given the Funs relatively small size of assets unr management ($200 million), access to top hee fun anprivate equity managers is likely to limite “Alternative assets更难打理,所以在收益一样的情况下,能少投就少投”。请问这是一个结论吗?但在强化串讲的讲义里,enwment的asset allocation里,不是要多投alternative吗?

2022-07-13 09:25 1 · 回答