Pass the PRMIA PRM Certification 8013 Questions and answers with ExamsMirror

Analytical methods are more 'efficient' than numerical methods in terms of computing power required, consistency of results and providing clarity on the inputs driving the results. Therefore 'efficient valuation' is not a reason to adopt numerical pricing methods over analytical methods.

It is much easier to incorporate changing stochastic volatility, discontinuous asset prices or other complex payoffs using numerical pricing methods. So these certainly represent good reasons to use numerical pricing methods for valuing exotics.

Therefore Choice 'b' is the correct answer.

From the put-call parity, we know that Call - Put = Stock - Bank deposit. Since the bank deposit has a zero delta, and the delta of the Stock itself is 1, we get the relationship Delta of Call - Delta of Put = 1. Therefore, if the delta of a call option is 0.3, the delta of the corresponding put option is 0.3 - 1 = -0.7

Price quotes for futures where one of the currencies is the US dollar follow the convention of using the number of US dollars that one unit of the foreign currency can buy. (For JPY, 100 Yen is used.)

In the forward market, the convention used is the same as that used in the spot market.

In the spot market, prices are expressed as the number of units of the foreign currency that 1 USD can buy, except for GBP, EUR, AUD and NZD where it is the other way round (ie, number of USDs that 1 of each of these currencies can buy).

The no-arbitrage futures price is given by exp(0.5*(4%-1%))*$1000 = $1015.11. Therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer.

The efficient frontier is a two dimensional plot with volatility and returns on its axes. For a given level of return, it helps identify the portfolio with the lowest volatility. From the other axis, it helps identify the portfolio with the highest return for a given level of volatility.

Therefore Choice 'b' is the correct answer. Note that in the exam you may be asked the question slightly differently.

The value of Bond 1 is $900,000 and the value of Bond 2 is $1,100,000, or their respective weights in the portfolio are 45% and 55% respectively. The combined duration is the weighted average of their individual durations, ie (45% x 5) + (55% x 10) = 7.75 years

The arbitrage pricing theory is a multifactor model for explaining asset returns as it can be used to incorporate multiple factors, for example inflation, GDP growth rate, employment, interest rates etc to explain asset returns. Choice 'a' is the correct answer.

The single index model, as the name implies, uses only a single factor, and so does the CAPM which uses excess returns to explain an individual security's returns. Neither of these are multi-factor models.

Since the zero coupon bond has no interim interest payments, its only cash flow is the final payment upon maturity. This would be identical to the spot rate from now till t years, where t is the maturity of the bond.

Forward rates are marginal rates that apply to individual years in a multi-period context. Short rates refer to short term interest rates in money market futures contracts. A zero coupon bond has no coupon.

Price quotes for futures where one of the currencies is the US dollar follow the convention of using the number of US dollars one unit of the foreign currency can buy. (For JPY, 100 Yen is used.)

In the forward market, the same convention as is used in the spot market is used.

In the spot market, prices are expressed as the number of units of the foreign currency that 1 USD can buy, except for GBP, EUR, AUD and NZD where it is the other way round (ie, number of USDs that 1 of each of these currencies can buy).

Imagine a bond that provides just two cash flows: $100 in one year and $10 in 10 years. Imagine another bond that pays nothing now but $100 in 10 years. Assume that both have identical yields to maturity. Yet despite the identical YTM, the bonds are quite dissimilar. For the first bond, we face the risk that we would receive the bulk of the present value of the bond in an year's time, and while there is a small amount due in 10 years, the first payment may not find an equally attractive investment opportunity. Reinvestment risk refers to the risk that cash flows from a bond may not be investible at the yield to maturity for the bond. In such cases, bonds that have longer durations are preferable.

A coupon bearing bond with a coupon rate lower than our benchmark bond will carry a lower reinvestment risk as its cash flows are weighted more towards the end. An amortizing bond returns a part of the principle periodically, increasing reinvestment risk. A higher coupon bearing bond will have a higher reinvestment risk, and a zero coupon bond will have the least reinvestment risk.