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

little_back · 2021年03月28日

请问老师,不选1的原因,是不是第一,不满足duration match ,第二,没有在yield curve stable的前提下sell convexity?

NO.PZ2019103001000053

问题如下:

Abram and Edgarton recently attended an investment committee meeting where interest rate expectations for the next 12 months were discussed. The Fund’s mandate allows its duration to fluctuate ±0.30 per year from the benchmark duration. The Fund’s duration is currently equal to its benchmark. Although the Fund is presently invested entirely in annual coupon
sovereign bonds, its investment policy also allows investments in mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and call options on government bond futures. The Fund’s current holdings of on-the-run bonds are presented in Exhibit 1

Over the next 12 months, Abram expects a stable yield curve; however, Edgarton expects a steepening yield curve, with short-term yields rising by 1.00% and long-term yields rising by more than 1.00%.

Based on her yield curve forecast, Abram recommends to her supervisor changes to the Fund’s holdings using the following three strategies:

Strategy 1: Sell the 3-year bonds, and use the proceeds to buy 10-year bonds.

Strategy 2: Sell the 5-year bonds, and use the proceeds to buy 30-year MBS with an effective duration of 4.75.

Strategy 3: Sell the 10-year bonds, and buy call options on 10-year government bond futures.

Based on Exhibit 1 and Abram’s interest rate expectations, which of the following strategies is expected to perform best over the next 12 months?

选项:

A.

Strategy 1

B.

Strategy 2

C.

Strategy 3

解释:

B is correct.

In a stable yield curve environment, holding bonds with higher convexity negatively affects portfolio performance. These bonds have lower yields than bonds with lower convexity, all else being equal. The 5-year US Treasury has higher convexity than the negative convexity 30-year MBS bond. So, by selling the 5-year Treasury and purchasing the 30-year MBS, Abram will reduce the portfolio’s convexity and enhance its yield without violating the duration mandate versus the benchmark.

请问老师,有两个问题,请老师帮助看一下理解是否正确:

问题一:与2相比,不选1的原因是不是(1)不满足duration match ,(2)没有在yield curve stable的前提下sell convexity进一步增加收益?

问题二:1增加的收益是不是等于10年期的YTM-3年期的YTM=2.34-1.4?同理,2增加的收益=2.95-1.8+sell convexity增加的收益率。




1 个答案
已采纳答案

发亮_品职助教 · 2021年03月29日

嗨,努力学习的PZer你好:


问题一:与2相比,不选1的原因是不是(1)不满足duration match ,(2)没有在yield curve stable的前提下sell convexity进一步增加收益?


正确。

卖出的3年期债券,他的Modified duration = 2.92;买入的10年期债券,他的MD=8.82;

同时,在题干有说,本题的Portfolio,他的Duration只允许变动±0.3(The Fund’s mandate allows its duration to fluctuate ±0.30 per year from the benchmark duration)

显然,卖出3年期债券、买入10年期债券,会大幅地增加组合的Duration;所以显然不符合要求。


Strategy 1这种卖出短期3-year债券、买入更长期10-year债券,其实可以看成是做Riding the yield curve策略。

因为根据题干,投资期是未来1年;由于收益率曲线是Stable yield curve,且根据表格发现YTM是向上倾斜的,所以本题是可以做Riding the yield curve的。

同样是投资期1年,用更长期的债券做Riding the yield curve产生的收益会更大;所以卖出3年期债券、买入10年期债券,同样是投资1年做Riding the yield curve,用10年期债券的收益肯定会更高。显然也会增强收益,且Riding the yield curve也是Stable yield curve下的策略。本题不选A,主要是因为Duration不满足±0.3变动的限制。


问题二:1增加的收益是不是等于10年期的YTM-3年期的YTM=2.34-1.4?同理,2增加的收益=2.95-1.8+sell convexity增加的收益率。


Strategy 1增强的收益还会更大一点,会大于2.34-1.4;原因是,买入10年期债券,投资未来1年,会产生更大的Roll down return(Riding the yield curve),这会额外有一部分收益增强。不过本题没有告诉我们9年期利率是多少,因此还没办法算出来Roll down return增强了多少。但Strategy 1收益的增强是大于(2.34-1.4)的。


Strategy 2的收益率差不多是(2.95-1.8+Sell convexity)的收益,不过不完全准确。

注意,表格里面给定的是国债的收益率。他并没有给出来MBS的收益率。准确来讲,收益的增强差不多是:30-year MBS收益率 - 10-year国债收益率。

以上大小,是可以近似等于(2.95-1.8+Sell convexity)。


在这种题型里,我们只需会判断用对应的策略即可,基本上没有收益增强的计算。

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

  • 1

    回答
  • 0

    关注
  • 517

    浏览
相关问题

NO.PZ2019103001000053 Abrwill rethe portfolio’s convexity anenhanits yielwithout violating the ration mante versus the benchmark.解析中这句话最后一句说的没有violate the ration mante怎么理解呢?

2021-10-05 18:40 2 · 回答

NO.PZ2019103001000053 Strategy 2 Strategy 3 B is correct. In a stable yielcurve environment, holng bon with higher convexity negatively affects portfolio performance. These bon have lower yiel thbon with lower convexity, all else being equal. The 5-yeUS Treasury hhigher convexity ththe negative convexity 30-yeMbon So, selling the 5-yeTreasury anpurchasing the 30-yeMBS, Abrwill rethe portfolio’s convexity anenhanits yielwithout violating the ration mante versus the benchmark. 卖3.0205份3年 买1份10年。他们不就ration netural了吗

2021-06-20 13:44 1 · 回答

NO.PZ2019103001000053 本题如果抛开题目对于ration 变化范围的限制,是不是应该ring the yielcurve 策略是收益最高的,我记得之前学ring the yielcurve时那道题是这么的

2021-05-15 11:44 1 · 回答

请问,1、strategy1卖短期债同时买长期债,是会增加convexity的,对吗?因为长期债期间现金流多于短期债,所以期限长的债券convexity更大。2、为什么说strategy1的本质是ring the yielcurve呢?(其他人提问的答案中这么说的)。strategy1并不是买入长期债持有一段时间后再卖掉,而是同时买卖不同期限债券,债券不同的;ring the yielcurve要求买入和卖出的应该是同一个债券吧。

2021-02-04 12:31 1 · 回答