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

颖哲 · 2021年04月18日

请问这题关于allocation的陈述为什么不对

* 问题详情,请 查看题干

NO.PZ201604030300004105

问题如下:

5. With regard to Locke’s condition regarding trade allocation, does Black’s response violate the CFA Institute Standards of Professional Conduct with respect to allocation reviews and interest adjustments, respectively?

选项:

A.

Yes.

B.

No, it violates the standards only with respect to allocation reviews.

C.

No, it violates the standards only with respect to interest adjustments.

解释:

A is correct.

Client suitability for an investment must be reviewed prior to allocation, not afterward. With respect to interest adjustments, clients who were incorrectly allocated shares must be paid for the use of their cash; however, in no instance should clients suffer a loss because of an allocation error by the manager (that is, have interest removed from their portfolio even though shares are put in their account on a back-dated basis).

请问这题关于allocation的陈述为什么不对?
1 个答案
已采纳答案

王暄_品职助教 · 2021年04月18日

问的是Black关于“allocation review和interest adjustment”的回应是否违反了CFA的准则。


定位文章中的trade allocation Black说的那段话。关于“allocation review”,Black说的是review at the end of each month against client’s IPS, 但应该是review before the allocation”并不是事后review。

后半句的关于interest adjustment,那些错误分配掉的利息应该credited to accounts没错,但是并不是debit from those account that should have received shares, 而是debit from 基金经理自身,因为这个错误是基金经理自己造成的。

徐威廉 · 2022年06月09日

Black说的是review at the end of each month against client’s IPS, 但应该是review before the allocation”并不是事后review。这样理解感觉好牵强啊,感觉就是Black说每月底review一下IPS也没有提到先allocation啊