Pass the PRMIA PRM Certification 8008 Questions and answers with CertsForce

The first order approximation of the VaR of an option position is nothing but the VaR of the underlying multiplied by the option's delta. This is intuitive because the delta is the sensitivity of the option price to changes in the prices of the underlying, and in this case since the delta is 0.3 and the underlying's VaR is $100, the VaR of the options position is 0.3 x $100 = $30. Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

(Note that the second order approximation of the VaR of an options position considers the option gamma too, and VaR reduces if gamma increases.)

One way to think about this question is this: we are provided with two pieces of information: if the portfolio is worth $100 to start with, it will be worth $95 at the end of year 1 and $85 at the end of year 2. What it is asking for is the probability of default in year 2, for the debts that have survived year 1. This probability is $10/$95 = 10.53%. Choice 'b' is the correct answer.

Note that marginal probabilities of default are the probabilities for default for a given period, conditional on survival till the end of the previous period. Cumulative probabilities of default are probabilities of default by a point in time, regardless of when the default occurs. If the marginal probabilities of default for periods 1, 2... n are p1, p2...pn, then cumulative probability of default can be calculated as Cn = 1 - (1 - p1)(1-p2)...(1-pn). For this question, we can calculate the probability of default for year 2 as [1 - (1 - 5%)(1 - 10.53%)] = 15%.

Normal mixtures, EVT and the t-distribution are all possible solutions addressing the issue of heavy tails in financial returns.

EWMA and GARCH address volatility clustering, which is the other problem when doing risk calculations. Therefore Choice 'b' is the correct answer as EWMA is not used to address heavy tails but volatility clustering.

The Basel II framework allows the use of the basic indicator approach, the standardized approach and the advanced measurement approaches for operational risk. There is no approach called the 'internal measurement approach' permitted for operational risk. Choice 'a' is therefore the correct answer.

A forward rate agreement allows one of the parties to borrow an amount at a rate for a length of time, all of which are agreed in advance. Consider a "3 x 6" FRA. This allows a fixed rate borrowing starting at 3 months till the end of 6 months. This is economically equivalent to holding a zero coupon bond till the end of 6 months, and being short another zero coupon bond till the end of 3 months (or the other way round, depending upon which end of the FRA you are on). Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

The VaR for a spot FX position is merely a function of the standard deviation of the exchange rate. If V be the value of the position (in this case, EUR 15m x 1.5 = USD 22.5m), z the appropriate z value associated with the level of confidence desired, and σ be the standard deviation of the portfolio, the VaR is given by ZσV.

In this case, the 10-day standard deviation is given by SQRT(10/250)*16%. Therefore the VaR is =1.645*15*1.5*(16%*SQRT(10/250)) = USD 1.1844m. Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

The distance to default is the number of standard deviations that expected asset values are away from the default point. The expression in Choice 'd' represents distance to default. Choice 'd' is the correct answer. The other choices are incorrect.

The number of futures contracts to sell are equal to $10m x 1.1/$50,000 = 220. Liquidating his portfolio would reduce the beta to zero, but would also get rid of the bets he wants to play on. Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

(Note that futures and spot prices generally move together allowing futures positions to be used for hedging the risk against movement in spot prices. However there is a basis risk between spot and futures, therefore the a perfect hedge is never possible with futures. If interest rates move a great deal, spot and futures prices may diverge. Of course, this risk is generally quite low but may become amplified with large leveraged portfolios. Just something to be aware of.)

Assuming time invariance and the Markov property, it is easy to calculate the transition matrix for any time period as P^n, where P is the given transition matrix for one period and n the number of time periods that we need to compute the new transition matrix for. Thus Choice 'b' is the correct answer.

A bank's stress testing programme in relation to firm wide stress tests should document the type, frequency and the purpose of the programme, as well as methodologies for defining scenarios and the remedial actions envisaged. Choice 'b' is therefore a necessary attribute of a robust stress testing programme.

The programme should be supported by a robust systems infrastructure that allows the execution of periodic as well as ad-hoc stress tests at the right level (business unit, as well as firm-wide) at the right level of detail or granularity. Choice 'c' also therefore is a valid choice.

A related element is data quality - without which no stress tests can be be credible.

Therefore all the choices listed are correct and Choice 'd' is the correct answer.