lawson的risk为什么increase了

NO.PZ2023032703000056 问题如下 Ams anjunior portfolio manager Frank Neeson review the fixeincome portfolios of two new finebenefit plclients, Lawson ors Cabinets, Inc., anWharton Farms.Neeson comments, “The rations for almost half of the bon in the Wharton portfolio are clusterearoun4 years, anthe rations of the remainr aroun12 years, while the rations of the Lawson portfolio bon are clusterebetween 6 years an8 years. In general, a laerebonportfolio approawoulimprove liquity management for both, although the Lawson portfolio woulexperienincrease in cash flow reinvestment risk anthe Wharton portfolio woulexperiena crease in convexity.”Is Neeson most likely correin his assessment of the effects of a laerebonportfolio approaon the Wharton anLawson portfolios? (2019 moAM) A.Yes B.No, because the Lawson portfolio is a bullet portfolio where the ration of its assets are matcheto the ration of its liabilities C.No, because the ration of the Wharton liabilities is greater ththof the Lawson liabilities owing to the younger age of its participants A is correct. A laereportfolio hlower convexity anspersion tha barbell portfolio but more tha bullet portfolio, given comparable ration ancash flow yiel. Lower convexity anspersion are sirable aspects in liquity management. In a laereportfolio, there is always a bonclose to remption enhancing liquity. bon mature, the fincoupon anprincipare available for stribution or creinvestein a long-term bonthe baof the laer. The Wharton portfolio is more of a barbell, hhigher convexity ththe Lawson portfolio, anwoulsee a larger rection in cash flow reinvestment risk with the rection of convexity.Neither ration nor the projectelife of the plrevethe convexity or spersion characteristiof the portfolio. 这三种 portfolio 的 reinvestment risk 是如何分辨的？如何去思考哪个大那个小

NO.PZ2023032703000056 问题如下 Ams anjunior portfolio manager Frank Neeson review the fixeincome portfolios of two new finebenefit plclients, Lawson ors Cabinets, Inc., anWharton Farms.Neeson comments, “The rations for almost half of the bon in the Wharton portfolio are clusterearoun4 years, anthe rations of the remainr aroun12 years, while the rations of the Lawson portfolio bon are clusterebetween 6 years an8 years. In general, a laerebonportfolio approawoulimprove liquity management for both, although the Lawson portfolio woulexperienincrease in cash flow reinvestment risk anthe Wharton portfolio woulexperiena crease in convexity.”Is Neeson most likely correin his assessment of the effects of a laerebonportfolio approaon the Wharton anLawson portfolios? (2019 moAM) A.Yes B.No, because the Lawson portfolio is a bullet portfolio where the ration of its assets are matcheto the ration of its liabilities C.No, because the ration of the Wharton liabilities is greater ththof the Lawson liabilities owing to the younger age of its participants A is correct. A laereportfolio hlower convexity anspersion tha barbell portfolio but more tha bullet portfolio, given comparable ration ancash flow yiel. Lower convexity anspersion are sirable aspects in liquity management. In a laereportfolio, there is always a bonclose to remption enhancing liquity. bon mature, the fincoupon anprincipare available for stribution or creinvestein a long-term bonthe baof the laer. The Wharton portfolio is more of a barbell, hhigher convexity ththe Lawson portfolio, anwoulsee a larger rection in cash flow reinvestment risk with the rection of convexity.Neither ration nor the projectelife of the plrevethe convexity or spersion characteristiof the portfolio. although the Lawson portfolio woulexperienincrease in cash flow reinvestment risk anthe Wharton portfolio woulexperiena crease in convexity.