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

返回

这次熬过去得了 · 2025年04月14日

asdasdsad

  1. CFA III
  2. 个人IPS

NO.PZ2024101802000019

问题如下：

A client’s limited partnership stake in a venture that invests in office buildings throughout Asia has been revalued such that this stake is now worth 30% less than estimated at the time the IPS was written. Assume that, prior to the revaluation, this stake accounted for 10% of the total market value of the portfolio and was worth EUR10 million, the target strategic allocation for global real estate securities. The lower bound for rebalancing is 8%. The next annual review of the IPS is scheduled in nine months. Which response below best describes the next IPS review?

选项：

A.

The next IPS review should take place in nine months as scheduled

B.

The next IPS review should be rescheduled as soon as possible with a focus on capital sufficiency analysis

C.

The next IPS review should be rescheduled as soon as possible to review the asset allocation of the portfolio

解释：

C is the correct response.

Given the assumption on the initial size of the limited partnership stake, the decline in the total portfolio value is just 3%, so a capital sufficiency analysis is unnecessary. Moreover, the allocation to Global Real Estate Securities declines to 7.2% (from 10%), so it is just below the 8% lower rebalancing limit for this asset class — see calculations below. Therefore, the next IPS review should be rescheduled as soon as possible to review the asset allocation of the portfolio with a view towards rebalancing. Decline in total portfolio value is -3%, Allocation to global real estate securities is 7.2%

Decline in total portfolio value:

Allocation to global real estate securities:

A is incorrect because significant changes in market conditions, such as the revaluation of the limited partnership stake, can create the need for an IPS review earlier than a scheduled once per year review. B is incorrect because the couple can tolerate portfolio volatility, and the decline in total portfolio value is just 3%, so a focus on the capital sufficiency analysis should not be a necessary aspect of the next IPS review.

qing请老师解答下，这个题目完全不知道是啥

添加评论
1 个答案

费费_品职助教 · 2025年04月15日

嗨，爱思考的PZer你好：


一位客户在一家投资亚洲各地写字楼的风险投资中的有限合伙股份已被重新估值，使得该股份现在的价值比撰写IPS时的估计值低 30%。假设在重新估值之前，该股份占投资组合总市值的 10%，价值为 1000 万欧元，这是全球房地产证券的目标战略配置。再平衡的下限是 8%。下一次投资政策声明的年度审查计划在九个月后进行。以下哪个选项最能描述下一次投资政策声明审查？

1.股份stake占整个组合的10%，股份下降30%，那么整个组合下降30%*10%=3% 下降的比例很小，不必要进行capital sufficiency analysis，因此B不对

2.股份下跌之后还剩余10%*1000万*70%，组合本身的价值还剩余【1000万欧元-（10%*3%*1000万）】即组合原本的价值减去股份跌掉的价值。那么现在股份占整个组合的比例是10%*1000万*70%/【1000万欧元-（10%*3%*1000万）】=7.2% 小于8%调整下限，所以需要再平衡，选C

这道题目在咱们基础班例题中有讲解，可以看看，有疑惑的地方再随时反馈

----------------------------------------------
加油吧，让我们一起遇见更好的自己！

  • 1

    回答

  • 1

    关注

  • 6

    浏览
相关问题

NO.PZ2024101802000019问题如下 A client’s limitepartnership stake in a venture thinvests in offibuilngs throughout Asia hbeen revaluesuththis stake is now worth 30% less thestimatethe time the IPS wwritten. Assume that, prior to the revaluation, this stake accountefor 10% of the totmarket value of the portfolio anwworth EUR10 million, the target strategic allocation for globreestate securities. The lower bounfor rebalancing is 8%. The next annureview of the IPS is schelein nine months. Whiresponse below best scribes the next IPS review? A.The next IPS review shoultake plain nine months schele.The next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible with a focus on capitsufficienanalysisC.The next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible to review the asset allocation of the portfolio C is the correresponse.Given the assumption on the initisize of the limitepartnership stake, the cline in the totportfolio value is just 3%, so a capitsufficienanalysis is unnecessary. Moreover, the allocation to GlobReEstate Securities clines to 7.2% (from 10%), so it is just below the 8% lower rebalancing limit for this asset class — see calculations below. Therefore, the next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible to review the asset allocation of the portfolio with a view towar rebalancing. cline in totportfolio value is -3%, Allocation to globreestate securities is 7.2% cline in totportfolio value:Allocation to globreestate securities: A is incorrebecause significant changes in market contions, suthe revaluation of the limitepartnership stake, ccreate the neefor IPS review earlier tha scheleonper yereview. B is incorrebecause the couple ctolerate portfolio volatility, anthe cline in totportfolio value is just 3%, so a focus on the capitsufficienanalysis shoulnot a necessary aspeof the next IPS review. 1，题干里面的10million是说portfolio是10million还是这个资产是10million2，资本下降了3%不需要做资本充足性分析，那得下降多少才需要，这里有明确标准吗，多谢

2025-02-01 15:11 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2024101802000019 问题如下 A client’s limitepartnership stake in a venture thinvests in offibuilngs throughout Asia hbeen revaluesuththis stake is now worth 30% less thestimatethe time the IPS wwritten. Assume that, prior to the revaluation, this stake accountefor 10% of the totmarket value of the portfolio anwworth EUR10 million, the target strategic allocation for globreestate securities. The lower bounfor rebalancing is 8%. The next annureview of the IPS is schelein nine months. Whiresponse below best scribes the next IPS review? A.The next IPS review shoultake plain nine months schele B.The next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible with a focus on capitsufficienanalysis C.The next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible to review the asset allocation of the portfolio Given the assumption on the initisize of the limitepartnership stake, the cline in the totportfolio value is just 3%, so a capitsufficienanalysis is unnecessary. Moreover, the allocation to GlobReEstate Securities clines to 7.2% (from 10%), so it is just below the 8% lower rebalancing limit for this asset class — see calculations below. Therefore, the next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible to review the asset allocation of the portfolio with a view towar rebalancing. cline in totportfolio value is -3%, Allocation to globreestate securities is 7.2%A is incorrebecause significant changes in market contions, suthe revaluation of the limitepartnership stake, ccreate the neefor IPS review earlier tha scheleonper yereview. B is incorrebecause the couple ctolerate portfolio volatility, anthe cline in totportfolio value is just 3%, so a focus on the capitsufficienanalysis shoulnot a necessary aspeof the next IPS review. 请问答案说明中7.2%是什么运算逻辑，不应该是7%么？

2024-10-28 00:16 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2024101802000019 问题如下 A client’s limitepartnership stake in a venture thinvests in offibuilngs throughout Asia hbeen revaluesuththis stake is now worth 30% less thestimatethe time the IPS wwritten. Assume that, prior to the revaluation, this stake accountefor 10% of the totmarket value of the portfolio anwworth EUR10 million, the target strategic allocation for globreestate securities. The lower bounfor rebalancing is 8%. The next annureview of the IPS is schelein nine months. Whiresponse below best scribes the next IPS review? A.The next IPS review shoultake plain nine months schele B.The next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible with a focus on capitsufficienanalysis C.The next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible to review the asset allocation of the portfolio Given the assumption on the initisize of the limitepartnership stake, the cline in the totportfolio value is just 3%, so a capitsufficienanalysis is unnecessary. Moreover, the allocation to GlobReEstate Securities clines to 7.2% (from 10%), so it is just below the 8% lower rebalancing limit for this asset class — see calculations below. Therefore, the next IPS review shoulreschelesoon possible to review the asset allocation of the portfolio with a view towar rebalancing. cline in totportfolio value is -3%, Allocation to globreestate securities is 7.2%A is incorrebecause significant changes in market contions, suthe revaluation of the limitepartnership stake, ccreate the neefor IPS review earlier tha scheleonper yereview. B is incorrebecause the couple ctolerate portfolio volatility, anthe cline in totportfolio value is just 3%, so a focus on the capitsufficienanalysis shoulnot a necessary aspeof the next IPS review. B不对的没看懂，能否一下，谢谢

2024-10-25 14:57 1 · 回答