8008 Exam Dumps - PRM Certification - Exam III: Risk Management Frameworks . Operational Risk . Credit Risk . Counterparty Risk . Market Risk . ALM . FTP - 2015 Edition

Netting is the ability to set just the net balances when amounts are both owed and due. Netting can take many forms. Payment netting is netting between counterparties that owe moneys to each other in the same currency under the same transaction (or master agreement). Closeout netting is when parties settle a net amount for the value of all outstanding transactions upon the occurrence of an event of default such as bankruptcy. Multiateral netting involves a third party that sets off exposures across counterparties that owe moneys to each other.

Closeout netting under the ISDA master agreement enables a party to terminate transactions early if an Event of Default or Termination Event occurs in respect of the other party. It involves the calculation and netting of the termination values of all transactions to produce a single amount payable between the parties. Closeout netting is therefore the correct answer.

If annual variance is 0.0256, then annual volatility (ie standard deviation) is √0.0256. Therefore the daily volatility will be √0.0256/√250 = 1.01%. The other choices are not correct.

In the Standardized Approach, banks’ activities are divided into eight business lines: corporate finance, trading & sales, retail banking, commercial banking, payment & settlement, agency services, asset management, and retail brokerage. Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

VaR calculations look at the lower part of the distribution of future portfolio values, for example, if the desired confidence level is 95%, the cut-off for the VaR calculation will be at the bottom 5%; similarly at 1% for a 99% confidence level. The number of observations that will end up in these bottom ranges will be few and sparse, and therefore their accuracy will generally be lower than, say, the average where observations are more likely to be concentratred. If the shape of the distribution of future portfolio values is not symmetrical and has a long tail to the left, then this problem gets further exacerbated as there may be even fewer and less reliable simulated numbers at the 5% or 1% quintiles. Thus the shape of the distribution will affect the accuracy of a VaR estimate. The distribution for a short option position, for example, will have a long tail to the left, and the VaR number will be quite significantly affected by a few simulations. On the other hand, for a long option position where the long tail is to the right, and we are interested in the left tail which is better defined and ends at zero we are more likely to get a better VaR estimate. Therefore Statement I is correct.

The number of simulations carried out directly affects the standard error, which is inversely proportional to the square root of the sample size (ie the number of simulations). THe accuracy of the VaR estimate can be increased by increasing the sample size (or reduced by reducing the sample size). Therefore Statement II is correct.

The confidence level selected for the VaR estimate also affects the accuracy of the estimate. To intuitively understand this, consider this extreme example where the desired confidence level is 99.9% and there are 1000 observations. Therefore the VaR will be determined by the last value in the sample, and will therefore be quite fickle and dependent upon what chance produces as the lowest value in the simulation. But if for the same sample the confidence level desired were to be 90%, there would be 100 observations beyond the 90% cut-off and this would be a much more stable and accurate number. Therefore the confidence level selected for the VaR estimate is also a determinant of the accuracy of the VaR estimate derived from the simulation. Statement III is correct.

Thus all statements are correct and Choice 'b' is the correct answer.

The square root of time rule can be used to convert, say a 1-day VaR to a 10-day VaR, by multiplying the known number by the square root of time to get the VaR over a different time horizon. However, there are key assumptions that underlie the application of this rule, and statements I to IV correctly state those assumptions.

Statements V and VI are not correct, because the application of the square root of time rule requires the absence of serial correlations, and also the absence of volatility clustering (ie independence). Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

The square root of time rule is also applied to convert volatility or standard deviation for one period to the volatility for a different time period. Remember that VaR is just a multiple of volatility, and therefore the assumptions that apply to the square root of time rule for VaR also apply to the same rule when used in the context of volatilities or standard deviation.

Three parameters define economic credit capital: the risk horizon, ie the time horizon over which the risk is being assessed; the confidence level, ie the quintile of the loss distribution; and the definition of credit losses, ie whether mark-to-market losses are considered in addition to default-only losses. The probability of default is not a parameter within the control of the risk manager, but an input into the capital calculation process that he has to estimate. Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

Time invariance refers to all time intervals being similar and identical, regardless of the effects of business cycles or other external events. The Markov property is the assumption that there is no ratings momentum, and that transition probabilities are dependent only upon where the rating currently is and where it is going to. Where it has come from, or what the past changes in ratings have been, have no effect on the transition probabilities.

Rating agencies generally provide transition probability matrices for a given period of time, say a year. The risk analyst may need to convert these into matrices for say 6 months, 2 years or whatever time horizon he or she is interested in. Simplifying assumptions that allow him to do so using simple matrix multiplication include these two assumptions - time invariance and the Markov property. Thus Choice 'c' is the correct answer. The other choices (normal distribution and zero skewness) are non-sensical in this context.

Choice 'b' is the correct answer. When two securities have a correlation of +1, they are effectively the same security. In such cases, the standard deviations of the two securities are additive, which means the VaRs can simply be added together to get the combined VaR. All the other choices are incorrect.

Choice 'c' in particular would have been correct if the securities were completely uncorrelated, ie if they had a correlation of zero.

Choice 'a' would have been correct if their correlation were -1.

Simulations of liquidity needs can be of various types: historical simulations, where the current positions are subjected to the kind of liquidity shocks experienced in the past; static simulations, where a static view of current positions, counterparty credit position, and the business is considered; and dynamic simulations where all factors are dynamically changed including counterparty credit standing, changes to the current portfolio and behavioural aspects of the business. Choice 'b' is incorrect as dynamic simulations require no such assumptions.

Liquidity risk is often thought of in terms of market liquidity risk and funding liquidity risk. Market liquidity risk relates to the the liquidity for a particular type of asset drying up. For example, during the 2007-2009 crisis a large number of corporate bonds and structured products became extremely illiquid. Market liquidity risk manifests itself in the form of higher bid offer spreads, higher pricde impact, and a reduction in the normal market size (ie, the 'normal' size of a trade for which a dealer quote is valid for). Therefore Choice 'd' is correct. Similarly, Choice 'a' is incorrect as adverse price impact results from market liquidity risk and not funding liquidity risk.

Market liquidity risk applies to the entire market and all its participants. It is not idiosyncratic. Therefore Choice 'c' is incorrect too. Funding liquidity risk on the other hand applies to an individual institution that is under liquidity stress in the sense of not being able to meet its obligations such as margin or collateral calls because of a lack of liquid assets. Thus it is funding liquidity that is idiosyncratic. Market liquidity risk often leads to funding liquidity risks materializing as firms are unable to get to the funds they were relying upon due to assets becoming illiquid.

High frequency and low severity risks, for example the risks of fraud losses for a credit card issuer, may have high expected losses, but low unexpected losses. In other words, we can generally expect these losses to stay within a small expected and known range. The capital requirement will be the worst case losses at a given confidence level less expected losses, and in such cases this can be expected to be low.

On the other hand, medium severity medium frequency risks, such as the risks of unexpected legal claims, 'fat-finger' trading errors, will have low expected losses but a high level of unexpected losses. Thus the capital requirement for such risks will be high.

It is also worthwhile mentioning high severity and low frequency risks - for example a rogue trader circumventing all controls and bringing the bank down, or a terrorist strike or natural disaster creating other losses - will probably have zero expected losses & high unexpected losses but only at very high levels of confidence. In other words, operational risk capital is unlikely to provide for such events and these would lie in the part of the tail that is not covered by most levels of confidence when calculating operational risk capital.

Note that risk capital is required for only unexpected losses as expected losses are to be borne by P&L reserves. Therefore the operational risk capital requirements for a low severity high frequency risk is likely to be low when compared to other risks that are lower frequency but higher severity.

Thus Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

Assuming time invariance and the Markov property, it is easy to calculate the transition matrix for any time period as P^n, where P is the given transition matrix for one period and n the number of time periods that we need to compute the new transition matrix for.

However, when the new time period is less than the time period the matrix is available for, the only way to deriving a transition matrix for a partial period is to numerically calculate a matrix M such that M^n = P. Therefore Choice 'b' is the correct answer. Taking cube roots of a matrix is not a possible operation, dividing by 3 gives a matrix meaningless in this context, and P x P x P will give us the transition matrix for 3 years, not 1/3rd of a year.

All the listed variables are relevant to management monitoring the credit risk profile of an institution, therefore Choice 'd' is the correct answer.

The Options Theoretic approach to calculating economic capital is a top-down approach that considers the value of capital as being equivalent to a call option with a strike price equal to the notional value of the debt - ie, the shareholders have a call option on the assets of the firm which they can acquire by paying the debt holders a value equal to their notional claim (ie the face value of the debt). Therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer and the other choices are incorrect.

The correct answer is choice 'a'

A long position in a credit sensitive bond is equivalent to earning the risk free rate and the spread on the bond. The risk free rate can be earned through a long position in a treasury bond, and the spread can be earned in the form of premiums on a CDS, which are received by the protection seller, ie the party short a CDS contract. Therefore we can get the same results as a long bond position using a combination of a long treasury bond and a short position in a CDS. Choice 'a' is the correct answer.

For the PRM exam, it is important to remember the z-multiples for both 99% and 95% confidence levels (these are 2.33 and 1.64 respectively).

The value at risk for an equity portfolio is its standard deviation multiplied by the appropriate z factor for the given confidence level. If we knew the standard deviation, VaR would be easy to calculate. The standard deviation can be derived using a correlation matrix for all the stocks in the portfolio, which is not a trivial task. So we simplify the calculation using the CAPM and essentially say that the standard deviation of the portfolio is equal to the beta of the portfolio multiplied by the standard deviation of the market.

Therefore VaR in this case is equal to Beta x Mkt Std Dev x Value x z-factor, and therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer.

Top down approaches rely upon available data such as total capital, income volatility, peer group information etc and attempt to imply the capital attributable to operational risk. They do not consider firm specific scenarios or causal factors. Bottom up approaches on the other hand attempt to determine operational risk capital based upon an identification and quantification of firm specific risks. Bottom up approaches help determine a traditional loss distribution from which capital requirements can be determined at a given level of confidence.

Therefore Choice 'd' is the correct answer.

Marginal liquidity gap measures the expected net change in liquidity over, say, a day. It is just equal to the liquidity inflow minus liquidity outflow. The cumulative liquidity gap measures the aggregate change in liquidity from a point in time, in other words it is just the summation of the marginal liquidity gap for each of the days included in the period under consideration. The residual liquidity gap goes one step further and adds available 'opening balance' of liquidity to the cumulative liquidity gap to reveal the days or times when the net liquidity is most at risk.

Liquidity at Risk measures the expected time to survival at a certain confidence level applied to the firm's cash flows - and is not a measure of the liquidity gap.

Therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer.

Marginal VaR of a component of a portfolio is the change in the portfolio VaR from a $1 change in the value of the component. It helps a risk analyst who may be trying to identify the best way to influence VaR by changing the components of the portfolio. Marginal VaR is also important for calculating component VaR (for VaR disaggregation), as component VaR is equal to the marginal VaR multiplied by the value of the component in the portfolio.

Marginal VaR is by definition the derivative of the portfolio value with respect to the component i. This is reflected in Choice 'a' above. Using the definitions and relationships between correlation, covariance, beta and volatility of the portfolio and/or the component, we can show that the other two choices are also equivalent to Choice 'a'.

Therefore all the choices present are correct.

If the hedge performs as expected, then any P&L on the long bond position will be offset by identical losses (or gains) on the hedge.

Since hedges are never perfect, and some residual risk such as basis risk, the inability to enter into an unrounded number of futures contracts will remain. However, the bulk of the risk would be mitigated, and the investor will be able to avoid any losses but will also forgo any gains. Therefore choice b is the correct answer and the rest are incorrect.

Using the beta for VaR calculations is a significant simplification based on the CAPM and the assumption that any specific risks are diversified away. The one thing a risk model based on the CAPM does not consider is the specific risk of individual stocks, because, as mentioned, these are considered to be offsetting each other so that the portfolio only carries market risk reflected in the beta.

Therefore Choice 'c' is not true and therefore the correct answer.

Volatility clustering leads to levels of current volatility that can be significantly different from long run averages. When volatility is running high, institutions need to shed risk, and when it is running low, they can afford to increase returns by taking on more risk for a given amount of capital. An institution's response to changes in volatility can be either to adjust risk, or capital, or both. Accounting for volatility clustering helps institutions manage their risk and capital and therefore statements I and II are correct.

Regulatory requirements do not require volatility clustering to be taken into account (at least not yet). Therefore statement III is not correct, and neither is IV which is completely unrelated to volatility clustering.

All of the distributions referred to in the question can be used to model the loss severity distribution for op risk. Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

The total value of the portfolio is $370 (=$100 + $120 + $150). The modified duration of the portfolio is the weighted average of the MDs of the different bonds, ie =(5 * 100/370) + (10 * 120/370) + (12 * 150/370) = 9.46.

This means that for every 1% change in interest rates, the value of the portfolio changes by 9.46%. Since the daily volatility of interest rates is 2%, the 95% confidence level move will be 1.65 * 2% = 3.30%. Thus, the VaR of the portfolio at the 95% confidence level will be 3.3 * 9.46% * $370 = $115.51.

All other answers are incorrect.

The change in the price of a security that follows a Weiner process is determined by its standard deviation and expected return. To get the price itself, we need to add this change in price to the current price. Therefore the future price in a Weiner process is determined by all three of current price, expected return and standard deviation.

The probability that only one of the three bonds will default is equal to the sum of the probabilities of the three scenarios where one bond defaults and the other two survive. This probability is given by 1%*(1 - 2%)*(1 - 3%) + (1 - 1%)*2%*(1 - 3%) + (1 - 1%)*(1 - 2%)*3% = 5.7818%. Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

The peaks-over-threshold model is used when losses over a given threshold are recorded, as is often the case when using data based on external public sources where only large loss events tend to find a place. The generalized Pareto distribution is also used when attempting to model loss severity using EVT. Lognormal mixtures and generalized hyperbolic distributions are not used as extreme value distributions.

Choice 'd' is the correct answer.

The probability of default would make the future cash flows from both the bonds identical. If p be the probability of default, the cash flows from the risky corporate bond would be

= (cash flows in the event of default x probability of default) + (cash flows without default x (1 - probability of default))

=> p*0 + (1 - p)*(1 + 8.5%) = (1 - p)*1.085.

The cash flows from the treasury bond would be 1.04. These two should be equal, ie,

1.04 = (1- p)*1.085, implying p = 4.15%.

(Note: The above is a simplification intended for the exam. In reality investors would demand a 'credit risk premium' for the corporate bond over and above the expected default loss rate. They are unlikely to be happy with just being compensated with exactly the expected default loss rate plus the risk-fre rate because the expected default loss rate itself is uncertain. They would demand some premium over and above what the default rate alone might mathematically imply above the risk free rate. In this question, this credit risk premium is ignored.)

Marginal probabilities of default are the probabilities for default for a given period, conditional on survival till the end of the previous period. Cumulative probabilities of default are probabilities of default by a point in time, regardless of when the default occurs. If the marginal probabilities of default for periods 1, 2... n are p1, p2...pn, then cumulative probability of default can be calculated as Cn = 1 - (1 - p1)(1-p2)...(1-pn). For this question, we can calculate the probability of default for year 3 as =1 - (1-2%)*(1-3%)*(1-4%) = 8.74%

Hazard rate x Loss given default = CDS quote. In other words, Hazard rate x (1 - recovery rate) = CDS quote. We can therefore calculate the hazard rate for this problem as 200 bps/(1 - 40%) = 3.33%.

A LIBOR based loan requires cash to move from the lender to the borrower in the amount of the notional. The Overnight Index Swap requires only the exchange of interest payments, and therefore represents less risk.

Therefore the LIBOR based loan is a riskier exposure.

The LIBOR is generally higher than the OIS. In fact, the difference between the two, the LIBOR-OIS spread, is a standard measure of the risk premium in the market that goes up when the risk of default by counterparty banks is considered high. This is because when the market perceives the risk of default to be high, the participants need a risk premium to take on the default risk which is considerably lesser with the OIS.

The correct answer is choice 'a'

Recall the following summary of the GARCH model. The long term variance in a GARCH model is given by ω/(1 - α - β). In this case, this works out to =SQRT(0.001/(1 - 0.05 - 0.93)) * SQRT(250) = 3.54%. Yesterday's volatility of 1% is irrelevant to the question.

In the February of 2009, the Federal Reserve (which is the US central bank system) and other US banking regulators embarked on a simultaneous assessment of the capital held by the 19 largest US bank holding companies. This was an unprecedented exercise of a kind never undertaken before, and was known as the Supervisory Capital Assessment Program (SCAP). The purpose of the exercise was to determine the amount of additional capital (called the 'capital buffer') each of the institutions covered would need to ensure that it would have sufficient capital if the economy weakened more than was then expected. The idea was that these financial institutions would then raise additional capital equal to their respective capital buffers by the fourth quarter of 2009.

Statement I is false on two counts: firstl the SCAP was conducted by the US central bank and other regulators, and not the 'Treasury Department' (the Treasury Department in the US is the equivalent of the Ministry of Finance in may other countries). Second, the SCAP was a one time exercise, and not annual.

Statement II is correct. The regulators prescribed rates of losses on credit assets of different kinds and other macro-economic assumptions, and asked the banks to determine the extent of losses they would need to bear (in addition to calculating them independently too). Therefore the SCAP was a stress test where the scenario was prescribed by the regulators.

Statement III is false. Capital buffer under the SCAP referred to the additional capital the banks would need to have certain ratios of capital, and not 'excess' capital.

Statement IV is correct. The SCAP envisaged two capital targets: a Tier 1 capital ratio in excess of 6% at the end of 2010; and a Tier 1 common capital ratio in excess of 4%. Therefore both the total Tier 1 capital and Tier 1 common capital were targeted.

Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

Choice 'd' is the correct answer. Settlement risk, as the name suggests, arises upon settlement when one of the parties delivers its obligation under the transaction and the other does not. Consider a EUR/USD FX forward contract maturing in a month. At maturity, one of the parties will deliver EURs and the other USDs. If one party fails to deliver, then it constitutes a very large risk to the other party. This risk is much larger than pre-settlement risk, because the amount at risk is the entire notional and not just the replacement value. Of course, settlement risk exists for a very short period of time, no more than a number or hours or a day.

There is no such thing as 'replacement risk', and credit risk is a larger category of which settlement risks is one component. Settlement risk is the most appropriate answer.

CreditRisk+ treats default as a binary event, ignoring downgrade risk, capital structures of individual firms in the portfolio or the causes of default. It uses a single parameter, λ or the mean default rate, and derives credit risk based upon the Poisson distribution. Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

This question is different in that it uses terminology you will not find in the PRMIA handbook. Yet it is important to understand these as there may be a question based on this slightly different terminology. (It is only the terminology that is different, the concepts are the same.)

If you read the PRMIA handbook, there are three methods of calculating VaR: Analytical or parametric, historical simulation and Monte Carlo simulations. There is one more way of categorizing the methods of calculating VaR, and these are as follows:

1. Local valuation: This refers to analytical or parametric VaR. This relies upon a neat statistical formula to calculate VaR and assumes a normal distribution. It also relies upon a known covariance matrix between the different components of VaR. Local valuation based VaR is further subdivided into two types:

a. Linear VaR: Linear VaR is calculated assuming the portfolio is linear, and its value changes just based upon the delta of the portfolio. In such cases, once a change (eg, in stock values) is known, that change is multiplied by the delta alone to get the VaR. Second order effects, such as gamma or convexity are ignored.

b. Non-linear VaR: Non linear analytical VaR is calculated using both delta and the second derivative, ie gamma or the convexity. This is more accurate if the portfolio is non-linear.

The key thing about 'local revaluation' VaR is that it does not require us to reprice or completely value all instruments in the portfolio. All we have to know is the delta (or the gamma and convexity as well) and multiply that with the number of standard deviations of change in the risk factor that we are interested in. So if we are considering a bond, we don't have to recalculate the new value of the bond as we can just use the delta. This can be a significant computational advantage for a large financial institution where there may be a large number of positions.

2. Full revaluation: This refers to a VaR method where the asset in question is fully repriced based on the new value of the risk factor - and this includes both historical and Monte Carlo based VaR methods.

Local revaluation, or analytical method based VaR is computationally easier to calculate, specially if based on just the delta-normal method (ie ignoring second order effects from convexity or gamma). But it will give incorrect results if the portfolio includes substantial non-linearity or other complexities. The full revaluation methods will always give the correct results, but they can be computationally difficult to arrive at.

Statement I is completely inaccurate - local revaluation methods do take correlations into account through the correlation or covariance matrices. Statement IV is false too - the 'delta normal' VaR refers to Var calculations based upon just the delta and do not account for the convexity or optionality. Statements II and III are correct. Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

Normal mixtures address fat or heavy tails, not volatility clustering. Therefore statement I is not correct.

Statement II is not correct. Where VaR is calculated at low levels of confidence, VaR based on normal mixtures may be lower than that under a normal assumption. This is no different than for other fat tailed distributions.

Statement III is correct. In situations where multiple market scenarios can unfold with a given probability, and each scenario is normal, we can express the result with a normal mixture where the underlying normal distributions have the probabilities of the different scenarios.

It is the cross-default clauses in debt agreements that generally provide that a default on one obligation is considered a credit event applying to all debts of the obligor, and therefore we are able to deal with credit risk at the borrower level, and not at the level of the individual security. It also helps avoid situations where borrowers can selectively default on some obligations while continuing to service others. Therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer. The other choices are incorrect.

Some risk experts have suggested the use of extreme value theory to model tail risk or extreme events for operational risk. The generalized Pareto model or the Peaks-over-Threshold (POT) model are often used to model extreme value distributions, and therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer.

The state of the economy, credit quality of individual borrowers and concentration risk are all factors that affect the credit risk facing a lender. Mark to market accounting does not change the credit risk, or the underlying economic reality facing the institution. Therefore Choice 'b' is the correct answer.

Deterioration in the balance sheets of key counterparties is a concern for a liquidity manager even though it may not immediately affect a firm, and this is true because counterparty failures may lead to liquidity shortfalls for an institution for no fault of its own. It is important for a liquidity risk manager to watch the health of key counterparties where exposure is concentrated and take timely steps to reduce it should the health deteriorate.

Under times of liquidity stress, prepayments of loans extended will decline while withdrawals of demand deposits are likely to increase. Both will not decrease, and therefore Choice 'b' is incorrect.

A bank is exposed to the undrawn portions of a line of credit extended to a borrower as the borrower, with superior information on its own finances, is likely to draw upon undrawn lines of credit thereby increasing the bank's exposure. Therefore Choice 'a' is incorrect. Generally, a portion of the undrawn part is counted towards a liquidity outflow.

Longevity risk is the risk facing sellers of annuities that their clients will outlive their assumptions on their length of life, while mortality risk is the downside risk for an insurer that clients will die sooner than expected causing the reserves to fall short of what is needed. Therefore Choice 'd' is not correct as the opposite is true.

Unexpected losses (UEL) for individual loans in a portfolio will always sum to greater than the total unexpected loss for the portfolio (unless all the loans are correlated in such a way that they default together). This is akin to the 'diversification effect' in market risk, in other words, not all the obligors would default together. So the UEL for the portfolio will always be less than the sum of the UELs for individual loans. Therefore statement III is true.This 'diversification effect' will be affected by the default correlations between the obligors, in cases where the probability of various obligors defaulting together is low, the UEL for the portfolio would be much less than the UEL for the individual loans. Hence statement IV is true.I and II are false for the reasons explained above.

Gross income is defined by Basel II (see para 650 of the Basel standard) as net interest income plus net non-interest income. It is intended that this measure should: (i) be gross of any provisions (e.g. for unpaid interest); (ii) be gross of operating expenses, including fees paid to outsourcing service providers; (iii) exclude realised profits/losses from the sale of securities in the banking book; and (iv) exclude extraordinary or irregular items as well as income derived from insurance.

What this means is that gross income is calculated without deducting any provisions or operating expenses from net interest plus non-interest income; and does not include any realised profits or losses from the sale of securities in the banking book, and also does not include any extraordinary or irregular item or insurance income.

Therefore operating expenses are to be not to be deducted for the purposes of calculating gross income, and neither are any provisions. Profits and losses from the sale of banking book securities are not considered part of gross income, and so isn't any income from insurance or extraordinary items.

Of the listed choices, only net non-interest income needs to be included for gross income calculations, and the others are to be excluded. Therefore Choice 'd' is the correct answer. Try to remember the components of gross income from the definition above because in the exam the question may be phrased differently.

When a default occurs, the proportion of the exposure represented by the recovery rate is recovered. For example, if the recovery rate is 40% for a loan, the actual loss in the event of a default would be $60 for a $100 loan. In other words, the loss given default = 1 - recovery rate. Hence Choice 'd' is the correct answer. All other choices are incorrect.

According to Basel II, where marking-to-market is not possible, banks may mark-to-model, where this can be demonstrated to be prudent. Marking-to-model is defined as any valuation which has to be benchmarked, extrapolated or otherwise calculated from a market input. When marking to model, an extra degree of conservatism is appropriate. Supervisory authorities will consider the following in assessing whether a mark-to-model valuation is prudent:

• Senior management should be aware of the elements of the trading book which are subject to mark to model and should understand the materiality of the uncertainty this creates in the reporting of the risk/performance of the business.

• Market inputs should be sourced, to the extent possible, in line with market prices. The appropriateness of the market inputs for the particular position being valued should be reviewed regularly.

• Where available, generally accepted valuation methodologies for particular products should be used as far as possible.

• Where the model is developed by the institution itself, it should be based on appropriate assumptions, which have been assessed and challenged by suitably qualified parties independent of the development process. The model should be developed or approved independently of the front office. It should be independently tested. This includes validating the mathematics, the assumptions and the software implementation.

• There should be formal change control procedures in place and a secure copy of the model should be held and periodically used to check valuations.

• Risk management should be aware of the weaknesses of the models used and how best to reflect those in the valuation output.

• The model should be subject to periodic review to determine the accuracy of its performance (e.g. assessing continued appropriateness of the assumptions, analysis of P&L versus risk factors, comparison of actual close out values to model outputs).

• Valuation adjustments should be made as appropriate, for example, to cover the uncertainty of the model valuation.

The model should be created independent of the front office, and not by it. Therefore statement III does not represent an appropriate choice. Choice 'a' is the correct answer.

Explantion:

Changing leverage does not affect the Sharpe ratio or the Information ratio. However, leverage magnifies both risk and return. Therefore Choice 'b' is the correct answer.Recall that Sharpe ratio is the ratio of the excess returns (over the risk free rate) of an investment to its standard deviation, and the information ratio is the ratio of the 'alpha' returns to the standard deviation of such returns.

If capital calculations are done in a standard way regardless of risk (as reflected by credit ratings), then it creates a perverse incentive for the lenders' employees to lend to the riskiest borrowers that offer the highest expected returns as there is no incentive to 'save' on economic capital requirements that are equal for both safe and unsafe borrowers. Therefore statement I is correct.

Given that the portfolio of such an institution is likely to then comprise poor quality borrowers, and economic capital would be based upon 'average' expected ratings, it is likely to carry lower economic capital given its exposures. Therefore any such economic risk capital model is likely to understate economic capital requirements. Therefore statement IV is correct.

Statements II and III are incorrect and Choice 'b' is the correct answer.

Since the business units are uncorrelated, we can get the combined EC as equal to the square root of the sum of the squares of the individual EC estimates. Therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer. [=SQRT(100^2+200^2+150^2)]

The credit spread is equal to the default rate times the loss given default, or stated another way, default rate times (1 - recovery rate). It is not equal to the default rate times the recovery rate. Therefore statement I is not correct.

When ratings are upgraded by rating agencies, the spread contracts and not widen. Therefore statement II is not correct.

Both recovery rates and probabilities of default are related to the business cycle, and they move in opposite directions. Economic recessions witness an increase in the default rate and a decrease in the recovery rate, and economic expansions result in a decrease in the default rate and an increase in the recovery rates when default does happen. Therefore statement III is correct.

Bond spreads incorporate both the risk of default, but also considerations of liquidity in the case of corporate bonds. Hence statement IV is correct.

A break close, also called a 'mutual put', gives either party the right to terminate a transaction at market price at a given date, or dates in the future. These are usually availed of in longer dated transactions, eg 10 years and over. For example, a 15-year swap might have a mutual put in year 5, and every 2 years thereafter.

All other choices are incorrect.

According to the Basel II framework, Tier 1 capital, also called core capital or basic equity, includes equity capital and disclosed reserves.

Tier 2 capital, also called supplementary capital, includes undisclosed reserves, revaluation reserves, general provisions/general loan-loss reserves, hybrid debt capital instruments and subordinated term debt issued originally for 5 years or longer.

Tier 3 capital, or short term subordinated debt, is intended only to cover market risk but only at the discretion of their national authority. This only includes short term subordinated debt originally issued for 2 or more years.

An interesting thing to note is the difference between 'subordinated term debt' under Tier 2 and the 'short term subordinated debt' under Tier 3. The distinction is based upon the years to maturity at the time the debt was issued. The remaining time to maturity is not relevant. For the subordinated term debt included under Tier 2, the amount that can be counted towards capital is reduced by 20% for every year when the debt is due within 5 years. This takes care of the time to maturity problem for Tier 2 subordinated debt. For Tier 3 short term subordinated debt, this is not an issue because debt will only qualify for Tier 3 if it has a lock-in clause stipulating that the debt is not required to be repaid if the effect of such repayment is to take the bank below minimum capital requirements.

The correct answer is choice 'a'

Recall the formula for calculating variance under EWMA. See below. Therefore the correct answer is =SQRT((1 - 0.93)*(LN(11/10))^2 + 0.93*((3.5%^2))) = 4.21%. Other answers are incorrect. Note that continuous returns are to be used, ie ln(11/10) and not discrete returns (=1/10) - though generally the difference between the two is small over short time periods. (If in the exam the answer doesn't exactly match, try using discrete returns.)