PRMIA 8006 Exam Dumps - Actual Questions Answers

The swap can be valued by valuing the two individual components of the swap.

The fixed rate bond equivalent in the swap is valued at =4/1.05 + 104/(1.06^2) = $96,369,154.

The FRN component will be valued at par as we are at a point where the rate has just been reset, ie $100m.

The investor is paying the fixed rate, and is therefore short the bond. He/she is receiving LIBOR, and is therefore long the FRN. The value of the swap to the investor therefore is +$100,000,000-$96,369,154 = $3,630,846

Detailed explanation:

An Interest Rate Swap exchanges fixed interest flows for floating rate flows. The floating rate leg is tied to some reference rate, such as LIBOR. The parties exchange net cash flows periodically. Conceptually, an interest rate swap is the combination of a fixed coupon bond and a floating rate note. The party receiving the fixed rate is long the fixed coupon bond and short the FRN, and the party receiving the floating rate is long the FRN and short the fixed coupon bond.

An interest rate swap can be valued as the difference between the two hypothetical bonds. FRNs sell for par at issue time as they pay whatever the current rate is, subject to periodic resets. Therefore immediately after a payment is made on a swap, the value of the FRN component is equal to its par value. The bond can be valued by discounting its cash flows. The difference between the two represents the value of the swap. When the swap is entered into, the fixed rate leg is set in such a way that the value of the hypothetical bond is equal to that of the FRN, and therefore the swap is valued at zero. The rate at which the fixed rate leg is set is called the swap rate. Over its life, market rates change and the value of the fixed coupon bond equivalent in our swap diverges from par (whereas the FRN stays at par - at least right after payments are exchanged and the new floating rate is set for the next period). Thus the swap acquires a non-zero value.

There are two ways to value a swap. If interest rates for the future are known, the bond and the FRN can be valued and their difference will be equal to the value of the swap. Sometimes, the current swap rates are known. In such a case, the swap can be valued by imagining entering into an opposite swap at the new swap rate, which will leave a residual fixed cash flow for the remaining life of the swap. This residual cash flow can be valued and that represents the value of the swap. For example, if a 4 year swap was entered into exchanging an annual fixed 5% payment on a notional of $100m for a floating payment equal to LIBOR, and at the end of year 1 the swap rate is 6%, then the party paying fixed can choose to enter into a new swap to receive 6% and pay LIBOR. All cash flows between the old and the new swap will offset each other except a net receipt of 1% for the next 3 years. This cash flow can be valued using the current yield curve and represents the value of the swap.

In this case, we need a portfolio that is "dollar duration" neutral, ie the net effect of any change in interest rates creates offsetting gains and losses in the asset and liability portfolios. The $125m asset portfolio with a duration of 15 years has a dollar-duration of $125*15/100=$18.75m, implying that a 1% change in interest rates will create a $18.75m change in the value of the asset portfolio. Similarly, the liabilities of $100m with a duration of 20 years mean that a 1% change in interest rates will lead to a $20m change in their value. Since $18.75m<$20m, the pension fund is short duration, and needs a strategy that will give it more duration. It can do so by buying more bonds, or swapping out some of its shorter duration bonds with longer duration bonds, or doing other things that will increase the duration of the portfolio so it becomes duration neutral.

Entering into an interest rate swap to receive fixed and pay floating is like a long position in a bond, which will increase duration. Thus Choice 'b' is the correct answer.

A swap to pay fixed and receive floating will have the opposite effect, and so will selling bond futures. Choice 'c' and Choice 'a' are therefore incorrect. As we have seen, Choice 'd' is incorrect as the fund does have interest rate exposure.

The put-call parity applies to European options and does not hold for American options because the latter can be exercised at any time up to expiry. Therefore statement I is false.

An American put can not be cheaper than a European put is correct. This is because the American put will always be valued at at least its intrinsic value whereas a European value may be valued at less than intrinsic value if the exercise date is too far away in the future. This is because a long time interval will increase the chance that the intrinsic value may not be realized at expiry. Because the American put can be exercised anytime, it will always be at least equal to its intrinsic value because if it were to be cheaper than that, investors would immediately buy and exercise it, creating a riskless profit. Therefore statement II is correct, and statement IV is correct as well.

It may be optimal to exercise an American put (unlike an American call - note the difference!) before its expiry on a non dividend paying stock. This would be the case only when the put is deep in the money. If the option is really deep in the money (say, when the underlying's price is down to zero), then it may be worthwhile to cash the option out prior to expiry as the upside might be lost if time were to be allowed to pass. Additionally, any further upside in the case of a deep in the money option may be zero or very little, and the time value of money would also make immediate exercise prefereable. Therefore statement III is not correct.