CFA Level II Mock Exam 5 - Questions (AM)

CFA Level II Mock Exam 5 – Questions (AM)

FinQuiz.com
CFA Level II Mock Exam 5
June, 2016
Revision 1
Copyright © 2010-2016. FinQuiz.com. All rights reserved. Copying, reproduction

or redistribution of this material is strictly prohibited. info@finquiz.com.
FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.


FinQuiz.com – 5th Mock Exam 2016 (AM Session)
Questions Topic Minutes

1-6 Ethical and Professional Standards 18
7-12 Quantitative Methods 18
13-24 Financial Reporting and Analysis 36
25-36 Equity Investments 36
37-42 Alternative Investments 18
43-54 Fixed Income 36
55-60 Derivatives 18
Total 180


Questions 1 through 6 relate to Ethical and Professional Standards
Timothy Vaughn Case Scenario
Timothy Vaughn is a portfolio manager at Horizon Asset Management specializing in

real estate securities. He is approached by Sylvia Walters, the manager of a real estate
investment trust (REIT) fund. Walters requests Vaughn to market the REIT index to his
clients and in return offers to pay a small service fee rate of 0.50%. After careful research
he concludes that despite the narrow scope of the fund, there is potential for
diversification as well as attractive risk and returns. He is unsure of the appropriate
course of action to take with respect to the service fees offered.
After consulting with a senior investment officer, Vaughn allocates the REIT fund to
suitable client accounts. A few days later, Walters modifies the policy of the fund. Under
the new policy, the fund is allowed to depart from its normal policies and strategies if
doing so is in the fund’s best interests. This change may include investing in derivatives
or ETFs outside the normal limits but in a manner consistent with fund objectives. She
notifies Walters of the policy change in a detailed email.
Walter’s email is redirected to a ‘spam’ folder in Vaughn’s inbox which he notices thirty
days later while clearing the contents of his inbox. He determines that informing clients is
not necessary as the fund’s allocation decisions will continue to remain consistent with
the objectives.
In an attempt to align the interests of junior portfolio managers with clients, Vaughn
designs a compensation scheme whereby each portfolio manager is required to achieve an
annual return of 5% to satisfy their clients’ minimum return objective. Any excess return
will be subject to evaluation to ensure unreasonable risks were not taken to achieve the
target. Bonuses are awarded to managers who have kept risk and return objectives in
consideration.
Unbeknownst to Vaughn, two managers make allocations to private real estate funds
which, although fall within permissible risk limits, require a significant initial investment
and are thus unaffordable by some clients.
During the course of his employment, Vaughn is offered to serve as the fund manager for
Vital Associates, a global asset management firm. He decides that he will accept the offer
after informing his employer and makes the necessary preparations for his departure.


Using public sources, he contacts clients who have closed their accounts at Horizon and
have moved to other asset managers. He also contacts clients who have received a request
for proposal by Horizon to manage their accounts but have not yet accepted.
On the day of his departure, Vaughn attends an investment conference hosted by Horizon
where Vital’s employees are also present. A research analyst at his new employer
discusses a research report he recently published on Think plc. He rated the manufacturer
as a buy and when asked his reason for doing so, the analyst made the following
justifications:
Justification 1: “I am using the company’s products for quite some time now and they
always manage to deliver superior quality.”
Justification 2: “My aunt serves as a department head at Think plc and she is highly
competent.”
Justification 3: “A client of ours happens to be the chief executive officer of Think plc.”
Upon joining Vital, Vaughn is requested to draft an ethical code of conduct for the
company.
1. With respect to the REIT fund arrangement, Vaughn’s best course of action
would have been to:
A. decline.
B. accept but decline the service fees offered.
C. accept but disclose the service fees received.
2. Is Vaughn in violation of the CFA Institute Standards of Professional Conduct

with respect to his response to the REIT fund policy change?
A. No.
B. Yes, with respect to misconduct as he has demonstrated negligence.
C. Yes, with respect to communication with clients and prospects by failing
to inform clients of the change.


3. The decision to implement the new compensation policy has led to a violation of
the CFA Institute Standards of Professional Conduct relating to:
A. suitability as it has led to inappropriate investment decisions.

B. responsibility of supervisors due to a failure to detect violations.
C. independence and objectivity as the policy will impair the ability to make
investment decisions in the best interests of firm clients.
4. Which of Vaughn’s departure preparations will most likely lead to a violation of

the CFA Institute Standards of Professional Conduct? Contacting Horizon’s:
A. current clients only.

B. prospective clients only.
C. both current and prospective clients.
5. In context of the justifications provided by the research analyst, which of the

following most likely represents a potential conflict of interest requiring disclosure
under the CFA Institute Standards of Professional Conduct?
A. Justification 1.
B. Justification 2.
C. Justification 3.
6. Which of the following provisions will most likely comply with the CFA Institute
Code of Ethics?
A. Uphold integrity in the workplace and act in a respectful manner towards

fellow colleagues.
B. Exercise reasonable care and judgment to achieve and maintain
independence in professional activities.
C. Providing assistance, either direct or indirect, to others in the violation of
company policies must be avoided.


Questions 7 through 12 relate to Quantitative Methods
Capital Management and Statistical Service Providers Case Scenario
Capital Management and Statistical Service Providers (CMSSP) is a U.S. based entity
that offers investment management firms with macroeconomic and capital market
forecasts, and similar forecasting services. Kelly Cronin is one of the statistical experts at
CMSSP and is presently using internally-developed software to explain the relationship
between a company’s EPS growth and profitable opportunities as measured by the spread
between the equity return on new projects and the firm’s cost of equity capital. After
regressing a sample company’s historical EPS on its return spread for the past ten years,
Cronin presented the results to his superior, Brendan Tracy. Exhibit 1 displays the results
of the regression.
Exhibit 1
Explaining EPS growth by changes in the return spread
Coefficients Standard Error
Intercept 1.207 0.5522
Return spread 22.901 1.992
Regression Statistics
Standard error of estimate 1.120
Observations 62
Mean return spread 0.0943
Variance of the mean return spread 0.007721
Cronin emphasized that the outputs to this regression could be used to predict future EPS
growth given the return spread. Tracy was unsure of the accuracy of predictions produced
by the regression. As a first step, he planned to estimate a confidence interval to perform
a hypothesis test at a 5% level of significance. Tracy tested the significance of the
regression’s slope coefficient to be sure that any predictions based on the regression were
reliable.
As Tracy reviewed Cronin’s regression analysis, he was also not sure how the key inputs
to the regression could affect the ultimate results. When he asked Cronin, she stated that
the analysis was sensitive to a number of key assumptions. As she explained the effects
of some of these inputs and assumptions, Cronin made the following comments:


Comment 1: “The standard error of estimate is an important input for a hypothesis test.
Small standard errors result in both tighter confidence intervals and tighter
prediction intervals.”
Comment 2: “The estimated value for the variance of the independent variable can also
affect hypothesis testing. The higher the assumed variance, the tighter the
prediction intervals. However, changes in the assumed variance will have
no effect on the confidence interval.”
Comment 3: “Assuming a single independent variable, a smaller sample size would be

reflected in a large prediction interval. If the sample size is increased, not
only with the prediction intervals tighten, the confidence intervals would
also tighten as the critical t-value decreases.”
Comment 4: “As the level of significance is decreased, the confidence interval would
tighten increasing the probability of the Type I error. This is also true for
the prediction interval.”
Tracy had just developed an ANOVA table for distribution to one of the firm’s clients.
The table showed the results of regressing the returns to technology stocks on the returns
to the market index and the market P/E ratio. The regression included 1,000 observations.
The sum of squared errors equaled 1,595.340 and the total sum of squares equaled
3,887.492. Apart from computing the combined significance of the independent
variables, Tracy formulated the following conclusions with respect to the F-statistic:
1. As the regression sum of squares is increased, the probability of the Type I error
is decreased.
2. As the sample size is increased, the probability of the Type II error is increased.
In addition to the above conclusions, Tracy also stated the following:
3. Since the R2 of the regression equals 0.56, the adjusted R2 will also effectively
equal 0.56.
4. In comparing the adjusted R2 or R2 of two models, it is imperative that the sample
sizes used to estimate the models are the same.
Tracy then shared his results with Cronin for further review.


7. Using the information provided in Exhibit 1, if the return spread equals 15%, the
95 percent prediction interval for EPS growth will be closest to:
A. 2.37% to 6.91%.
B. 2.40% to 6.88%.
C. 2.08% to 7.21%.
8. The confidence interval for the slope coefficient at the 5% significance level is
closest to:
A. 20.66 to 25.14.
B. 18.92 to 26.88.
C. 22.73 to 23.08.
9. Cronin is most accurate with respect to:
A. Comment 1 only.
B. Comment 2 only.
C. Both comments 1 and 2.
10. Cronin is most accurate with respect to:
A. Comment 3 only.
B. Comment 4 only.
C. Both comments 3 and 4.
11. The F-statistic for the regression that Tracy is estimating is closest to:
A. 346.96.
B. 716.23.
C. 1,214,73.
12. Has Tracy most likely based his conclusions on sound financial theory?
A. Only with respect to Points 1 and 3.

B. Only with respect to Points 1, 2 and 3.
C. Only with respect to Points 2 and 4.


Questions 13 through 18 relate to Financial Reporting and Analysis
Investa-Corp Service Providers Case Scenario
Investa-Corp Service Providers (ICSP) is a financial advisory firm established to

exclusively serve large institutional clients, including foundations, endowments and
pension plans. Anna Gunn is the chief research analyst; the person in charge of
supervising and overseeing ICSP’s pension funds. Gunn is particularly interested in the
pension plan offered by Lavender Products (LAPRO), a renowned U.S. based firm in the
cosmetics and fashion industry. To discuss the appropriate asset allocation of LAPRO’s
pension portfolio, Gunn met with Bryan Cranston, a member of LAPRO’s board of
directors. Since Cranston was also a financial expert, he understood the implications of
changes in pension plan assumptions on the reported numbers in the financial statements.
While in conversation with Gunn, Cranston mentioned the following changes:
Change 1: “Due to increased inflation, the board has decided to increase the estimate of
the interest rate applicable to our pension plan.”
Change 2: “Since our pension portfolio has been increasingly investing in equities, our
board has revised upward, the estimate of expected return on our plan
assets.”
In incorporating these revised estimates in his calculations, Gunn tried to determine the
affect they would have on LAPRO’s financial statements. In doing so, she gathered the
following information about the firm’s pension plan.
Exhibit 1
LAPRO’s Pension Plan Status for the year 2010 (in US$ millions)
Beginning Projected Benefit Obligation $3,125
Ending Projected Benefit Obligation $5,520
Beginning plan assets 1,555
Ending plan assets 2,905
Employer Contributions 950
Payments to retirees 1,120


Reviewing the plan’s history, Gunn established that LAPRO frequently made
contributions to the pension plan in excess of those required by regulation. Around two
years ago, when the firm’s total pension cost for the period equaled $260 million, the
firm also disclosed that it made a contribution of $350 million. Gunn reached the
following conclusion:
“Given LAPRO’s effective tax rate of 23.5%, the firm’s CFO for that year should be
increased by $68.85 million and CFF should be decreased by $68.85 million“.
As Gunn was going through LAPRO’s financial statements, notes to the statements, and
similar disclosures, she found out that, in addition to promised future payments to its
employees, the firm also offered share-based compensation including stock grants and
stock options. An excerpt from Note 3 related to stock compensation plans is provided in
Exhibit 2.
Exhibit 2
Stock-based compensation in Note 3 to the Financial Statements of LAPRO
As of December 31, 2007, the firm had approximately $220

million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to
compensation arrangements granted. The vesting period equals
3.57 years. This cost does not include any future compensation
awards.
Realizing that this expense was considerable relative to the firm’s total assets during the
same period, Gunn called Cranston to discuss the implications of such costs. Gunn made
the following comments:
Comment 1: “During the period under analysis, compensation expense related to options
will approximately equal $62 million for the years 2008 and 2009.”
Comment 2: “This compensation expense will reduce retained earnings, and will thus
reduce the firm’s equity.”


As Gunn was working on LAPRO’s pension plan assessments, she received a call from
Todd Willington, a close friend working as an independent consultant. Willington invited
Gunn over to discuss the performance of Austin Steel Company (ASC), a steel giant
operating in the U.S. When Gunn reached Todd’s place, he stated that ASC’s financial
statements included a considerable amount of revaluation surpluses and impairment
charges and he was not sure how this affected ASC’s performance ratios. Todd provided
Gunn with the information given in Exhibit 3.
Exhibit 3
ASC’s Excerpts from Financial Statements as of December 31 (in $ millions)
2010 2011
Total assets 2,500 3,400
Total liabilities 1,450 2,333
Revaluation surplus - 275
Depreciation expense 250 310

*The increase in depreciation expense relates to the revaluation surplus
In addition to the information provided in the Exhibit, Todd also told Gunn that ASC
owns a melting machine with a carrying value of $60,000. However, just recently, ASC’s
management determined that the future cash flows generated from the machine equaled
only $10,500/year for the next six years. As such, the firm has reported an impairment
loss in its financial statements. The firm uses a discount rate of 10%.
As a final favor, Todd inquired about the affects of capitalizing versus expensing the
purchase of a long-lived asset on a firm’s financial statements. Gunn stated that if a firm
continued to purchase assets such, that in a particular year, the depreciation expense
equaled the capital expenditures made by the firm, pretax profits would be reduced by the
same amount regardless of whether the firm capitalized or expensed the purchase. Todd
was intrigued and added that, for a company capitalizing an expenditure, current
profitability would be enhanced and the firm would experience a favorable cash flow
impact. This was because an expenditure that was capitalized appeared as an investing
cash outflow and not as an operating one.


13. Given the changes in assumptions related to LAPRO’s pension plan, compared to
an identical firm that prepares its financial statements under IFRS and follows
identical revisions, the current pension related expense in the income statement
would be:
A. higher for LAPRO, but the balance sheet effect would be the same.
B. lower for LAPRO, but the balance sheet effect would be the same.
C. lower for the IFRS firm, and the balance sheet effect would differ.
14. Is Gunn most likely correct with respect to her comment about adjusting for
LAPRO’s contributions to the pension plan, and what is the total periodic pension
cost for the year ended 2010 for LAPRO?
A. Yes, and the total periodic pension cost is $95 million.

B. No, and the total periodic pension cost is $1,045 million.
C. Yes, and the total periodic pension cost is $1,995 million.
15. Gunn is most accurate with respect to:
A. Comment 1 only.
B. Comment 2 only.
C. both comments 1 and 2.
16. Using Exhibit 3, ignoring the effect of taxes and considering the revaluation
independent of any other changes, the adjusted leverage for ASC, as of December
31 2011, based on average figures, will be closest to:
A. 2.99.
B. 3.02.
C. 3.74.
17. With regards to the melting machine, the impairment loss under U.S. GAAP and
IFRS will be closest to:
A. $14,270 under U.S. GAAP and $14,270 under IFRS.

B. 0 under U.S. GAAP and $14,270 under IFRS.
C. 0 under IFRS and $14,270 under U.S. GAAP.


18. With respect to capitalizing vs. expensing, are Gunn and Todd most likely correct?
A. Only Gunn is correct.

B. Both Gunn and Todd are correct.
C. Neither Gunn nor Todd is correct.


Questions 19 through 24 relate to Financial Reporting and Analysis
Portico Enterprises Case Scenario
Michael Norris is a research analyst working for Old Rock Investments (ORIN), a sell-
side investment firm in Oklahoma, USA. Norris has been advised to prepare a report on
Portico Enterprises (PENT), a firm that operates in the residential and commercial
construction industry. Based on a preliminary analysis of the firm, Norris determined that
the firm had considerable investments in the debt and equity securities of other
companies. Realizing that such investments could have a considerable impact on a
company’s financial position, Norris decided to perform a comprehensive analysis of
PENT’s intercorporate investments. He approached Diane Cross, a financial expert at
ORIN, to discuss details regarding the accounting treatments of various categories of
corporate investments. When talking about reclassifications of assets under IFRS and
U.S. GAAP, Cross made the following comments:
Statement 1: “Under U.S. GAAP, if a security is reclassified out of the held for trading
category, or is reclassified as held for trading from another category,
unrealized gains and losses are recognized in profit and loss. Although
under IFRS, reclassification out of held for trading is restricted, if done, the
treatment is similar to that under U.S. GAAP.”
Statement 2: “Under U.S. GAAP if a debt security is reclassified as available for sale
from held to maturity, or as held to maturity from available for sale, the
unrealized gains and losses are amortized over the remaining life of the
security as an adjustment to yield.”
Norris then presented Cross with data on held -for-trading investments made by PENT in
the securities of Spartan Products Inc. (SPInc.). While going through PENT’s notes to
financial statements, Norris found out that SPInc. had not made its currently due principal
and interest payments to PENT. In addition, market information speculated that SPInc.
was at the brink of bankruptcy due to severe financial losses. As Cross heard this
information, she stated that PENT should immediately recognize an impairment loss
related to the securities in its financial statements. Since PENT prepared its statements in
accordance with U.S. GAAP, the cost basis of the securities would be written down and
an impairment loss would be reported in the income statement.
Norris also stated that PENT had invested in the debt securities issued by Spot
Enterprises (SPEN). The securities appeared in the financial statements under held-to-
maturity investments, and amounted to 15% of PENT’s total intercorporate investments.


Norris believed that the investment value was overstated since the securities could no
longer be easily traded due to a disappearance of an active market in them. In addition, a
downgrade of SPEN’s credit rating was anticipated which, if realized, could result in
considerable losses. As a result, Norris reduced the carrying amount of the securities by
an amount equal to the difference between their carrying value and the present value of
their estimated future cash flows discounted at their original effective interest rate. Norris
also recognized this loss in SPEN’s profit and loss.
To bring some numbers to the table, Norris presented the following exhibit displaying
information about the fair value of PENT’s investment in A-Dee Company Limited
(ADCL). PENT invested $550,000 in ADCL on 1 January 2010. The par value of the
securities at the time was $435,000. The stated rate equaled 7.5% and the market interest
rate was 5.0%.
Exhibit 1
PENT’s investment in ADCL
Fair value as of 31 December 2010 $650,000
Fair value as of 31 December 2011 $700,000
Benefiting from her meeting with Norris, Cross mentioned a report she was preparing on
the stock of AXE Associates. AXE, a U.S. based firm, had acquired 35% of the
outstanding shares of BLADE Incorporated, and had accounted for it using the equity
method. AXE paid $350 million in exchange for 35% of BLADE’s net assets that
equaled a book value of $275,000 and a fair value of $300,000. After listening to Cross,
Norris made the following comment:
Comment 1: “AXE would report goodwill on its balance sheet in addition to its
proportionate share of BLADE’s net assets adjusted for fair value. This
goodwill should be tested for impairment at least annually, and adjusted for
any losses. If the impairment loss is greater than the goodwill recognized,
the maximum loss would equal the carrying amount of goodwill.”
He continued with the following comment:
Comment 2: “AXE can choose to account for its equity method investment in BLADE
at fair value. If it does, the investment account on AXE’s balance sheet will
not reflect its proportionate share of BLADE’s profit or loss, dividends and
other distributions. In addition, goodwill is not created.”


Cross also mentioned the sale of inventory by AXE to BLADE in the year 2011. The
inventory’s cost and sale price equaled $100,000 and $250,000 respectively. BLADE
resold that inventory $150,000 of that inventory during the same y ear. The remainder
was sold in 2012. Exhibit 2 displays some information about BLADE Inc.
Exhibit 2
BLADE Incorporated
Net income 2011 1,300,000
Net income 2012 1,600,000
Excess purchase price attributable 50,000

to property
Property’s remaining life 10 years
Cross was trying to determine the effect of this sale on the reported equity income in
AXE’s balance sheet.
19. Cross is most accurate with respect to:
A. Statement 1 only.
B. Statement 2 only.
C. Neither statement 1 nor statement 2.
20. Is Norris’s treatment of impairment losses on the securities of SPInc. and SPEN
most likely justifiable?
A. Yes.
B. No, because their measurement and reporting of losses is incorrect.
C. No, because their analysis leading to the determination of impairment is
incorrect.


21. If PENT’s investment in ADCL was initially recognized as either held-to-maturity

or held-for-trading, and the securities were sold on 1 January 2012 for $675,000,
which of the following would best describe the gain/loss to be reported on the
income statement?
A. The amount of realized gain under held-to-maturity would be $135,506,

and the realized loss under held-for-trading would be $25,000.
B. The amount of realized gain under held-for-trading would be $25,000, and
the realized gain under held-to-maturity would be $130,125.
C. The amount of realized gain under held-for-trading would be $25,000, and
the realized loss under held-for-trading would be $125,000.
22. With respect to AXE’s investment in BLADE, Norris is least accurate with
respect to:
A. Comment 1 only.
B. Comment 2 only.
C. neither comment 1 nor comment 2.
23. Ignoring any prior equity income, the reported equity income related to BLADE
on AXE’s balance sheet in 2012 will be closest to:
A. $429,000.
B. $541,000.
C. $579,000.
24. Ignoring any prior equity income, if the sale of inventory was by BLADE to
AXE, the reported equity income on AXE’s balance sheet in 2012 would have
been closest to:
A. $579,000.
B. $615,000.
C. $705,000.


Questions 25 through 30 relate to Equity Investments
Insta-Call Cellular Products Case Scenario
Cynthia Philips is an investment expert at the corporate finance department of Insta-Call

Cellular Products (ICCPInc.), a firm that specializes in manufacturing high-end cellular
devices including smart phones. During their recent meeting, the board of directors at the
firm recognized the portable gaming industry as a profitable segment of the technology
market that the firm could target. As the appointed head of the project’s evaluation team,
Philips planned to estimate future cash flows and apply the NPV criterion for an accurate
capital budgeting decision. While calculating the increase in revenues attributed to the
addition of portable gaming devices to the product mix, Philips determined that such
devices would have a potential substitution effect on the smart phone market. Hence,
Philips accumulated all the relevant data that would aid him with his analysis. Exhibit 1
displays this information.
Exhibit 1
Revenue Projections for fiscal year 2012 and 2013 (in US$ ‘000)
FY 2012 FY2013E
Consolidated Revenue $45,000,000 $54,000,000
COGS 12,000,000 -
Operating Expenses 15,500 -
Total portable gaming device(PGD) - 110,000 units
shipments
% of shipments to individuals - 67%
% of shipments to corporations - 33%
Cannibalization factor, individual - 35%
Cannibalization factor, corporations - 15%
Average selling price of PGD to - $350/unit
individuals
Average selling price of PGD to - $500/unit
corporation
*The revenue figures are pre-cannibalization numbers.
In addition to the above data, Philips also made the following assumptions for
determining expected values:


Assumption 1: “The $ change in cost of goods sold would be the same as the $ change
in revenue.”
Assumption 2: “The operating expenses would change at half the rate of the change in
revenue.”
Assumption 3: “Cash taxes as a percent of FY2012’s revenue would be the assumed tax
rate.”
Besides estimating the effects on the firm’s financials of investing in the project, Philips
also formulated the following conclusions:
Conclusion 1: “Relative to pre-cannibalization, post-cannibalization numbers would

make the firm look more expensive in terms of the P/E multiple.’
Conclusion 2: “Using post-cannibalization figures, the firm’s return on assets would be

lower than the pre-cannibalization return on assets. However, the
operating margin would be higher.”
Conclusion 3: “Although the effective tax rate, pre and post cannibalization, would be
the same, cash taxes would be lower post cannibalization.”
Conclusion 4: “Relative to the FY2012 values, the gross profit margin would remain the
same whether or not cannibalization is considered.”
The capital budgeting division at ICCPInc. was also evaluating an acquisition of Connect
Networks (CNET), a small, private firm in a similar business. Anne Webb was the
valuation expert involved with writing a feasibility proposal to the firm’s board. Exhibit 2
displays the data gathered by Webb.
Exhibit 2
Connect Networks Operating income
Gross Profit $355,000
Selling, general, and admin expenses $125,500
Depreciation $40,000
Taxes $47,375
Operating income after taxes $142,125


To determine the firm’s free cash flow to the firm, Webb made the following
assumptions:
• Revenues would increase by $150,000 and gross profit would be 30% of

revenues.
• Expected total revenues would equal $689,000 and depreciation would be 7.5% of
revenues.
• SG&A expenses are expected to stay at their current normalized level, and the tax
rate is also expected to remain constant.
• Working capital equal to 15% of revenues is required.
• Capital expenditures are expected to equal depreciation expense plus 6.0% of
incremental revenues.
• The required returns on working capital and fixed assets are 6.0% and 12%
respectively.
• The discount rate for intangible assets is found by equating the WACC with the
weighted values of working capital, fixed assets, and intangible assets, and is
equal to 10%.
Webb also determined the following:
• The CEO of CNET’s received compensation for the year was $50,000 less than
the normalized compensation expense for a similar company’s CEO.
• Certain real estate assets for CNET were not used in the core operations of the
firm. Expenses associated with the assets totaled $20,000, including $10,000
reflected in SG&A expenses and the remaining included as depreciation expense.
• CNET’s capital structure has an insignificant amount of debt. Hence, Philips
believes that interest expense should be excluded from calculations.
• A small office was just acquired by CNET for running its operations. Expenses
related to this office equal $30,000 and are reflected in SG&A expenses.
Webb then proceeded with writing the report.
25. Philips is least accurate with respect to:
A. Conclusion 1 only.
B. Conclusion 2 only.
C. Neither conclusion 1 nor conclusion 2.


26. Philips is most accurate with respect to:
A. Conclusion 3 only.
B. Both conclusions 3 and 4.
C. Neither conclusion 3 nor conclusion 4.
27. Using the numbers in Exhibit 1, the post cannibalization expected cost of goods
sold would be closest to:
A. $9,249 million.
B. $14,801 million.
C. $19,033 million.
28. The normalized earnings for CNET are closest to:
A. $119,625.
B. $127,125.
C. $142,125.
29. Given Webb’s assumptions, the expected residual income associated with CNET
is closest to:
A. $17,263.
B. $47,263.
C. $33,263.
30. Is Webb’s method of estimating the discount rate applicable to intangible most
likely correct?
A. Yes.
B. No, because market return levels must be considered.
C. No, because market return levels and CNET’s borrowing costs must be
considered.


Questions 31 through 36 relate to Equity Investments
Ascend Venture Exploration Case Scenario
Ascend Venture Exploration (AVEX) is an investment firm prominent for its investments
in venture capital and private equity in USA. The key to the above-average success rate
for AVEX’s funds is the extensive research of target companies by a specialized group of
professionals at the firm. Every aspect of the future performance of each company is
analyzed, including financial, operational, and strategic areas as well as the probability of
litigation and other legal issues. Carolyn Pickman is the senior financial executive (SFE)
of AVEX who has been involved with several of AVEX’s successful ventures. Pickman
leads the management team of The AVEX Panorama Fund (APF), a fund with an average
life of 5 years. Pickman is working with Andrew Bean to develop a value indication for
Trust Pharmaceuticals (TPH), a private company operating in Dallas, Texas. Bean
believes that the market value of invested capital to EBITDA multiple would be
appropriate to determine a value estimate for TPH. Following Pickman’s instructions,
Bean obtained financial information of several public companies that he believed could
serve as guidelines for valuing TPH. Bean presented the following results of his research:
• The mean MVIC to EBITDA multiple using multiples of comparable public

companies is 8.5.
• Since most guideline firms were characterized by high growth and high leverage,
an 18% downward adjustment for TPH’s relative risk and growth characteristics
is warranted.
• Normalized EBITDA for TPH equals $14.5 million.
• The face value of debt capital for TPH equals $3.5 million.
• The present state of the pharmaceutical industry is characterized by acquisition
activity involving several public companies. Research on the pricing and
valuation of these transactions indicates an equity control premium of 55%.
• TPH is operating at a debt/equity ratio of 65/35.
• TPH is expected to experience significant volatility in the near future financial
performance.
After reviewing Bean’s research, Pickman made the following comment:
“I believe that similar information could be used for value estimation of a relatively large
minority interest in TPH based on the guideline transaction method.”
Bean agreed and responded with the following comment:


“If a small equity interest in TPH is to be calculated, a reduction to value associated with
lack of ready marketability would be necessary. Given my study, a 35% lack of
marketability discount would be needed to accurately measure the value of a small equity
interest in TPH.”
Pickman was skeptical of Bean’s analysis and the accuracy of his accumulated data. To
verify Bean’s reported figures, Pickman obtained a research report written by Stephen
Misek, a private equity analyst at AVEX, on the valuation of TPH. Misek had presented
TPH’s value using both the guideline public company method and the guideline
transaction method. While reading the report, Pickman pinpointed the following:
• The EPS growth rates of comparable public companies averages approximately

7.0% below the average EPS growth rate for TPH.
• The risk level of guideline companies merits a 10% upward adjustment to the
baseline multiple.
• Given information about recent acquisitions of similar companies, the differences
in risk and growth prospects of the acquired companies relative to TPH is similar
to the differences reported under the GPC method.
• The average MVIC to EBITDA pricing multiple of comparable public companies
equals 12.00.
As Pickman approached the conclusion of Misek’s report he read that a multiple of 17.00
was applied to normalized EBITDA to determine value under the GTM method.
Given the contrast in Bean’s valuation relative to Misek’s, Pickman initiated a study on
the appropriateness of various valuation procedures given the unique characteristics of
the private firm under study. After careful investigation, Pickman discovered that the
choice of valuation method depended on the stage of the firm’s life cycle and on whether
a controlling or minority interest is to be valued. Specifically, Pickman studied the
following three cases:
Firm A: A minority interest in a development stage entity.

Firm B: A controlling interest in an early stage company.
Firm C: A minority interest in a later stage entity.


31. The value of Trust Pharmaceuticals using the guideline public company method is
closest to:
A. $117,020,012.
B. $153,150,750.
C. $163,706,387.
32. The calculation of value for Trust Pharmaceuticals given Bean’s research will
most likely be:
A. Overstated due to the use of normalized EBITDA since actual volatility in

earnings will be greater.
B. Understated given TPH’s debt/equity ratio and volatility in financial
performance.
C. Correctly stated, since the research of guideline companies is correctly
applied under the guideline company method.
33. Assuming the baseline multiple for the GPC and GTM methods are the same, the
value for a large, minority interest in TPH using the GTM method will be closest
to:
A. $41,979,250.
B. $78,109,987.
C. $81,250,582.
34. Using the GTM method, the adjusted multiple to value a small minority interest in
TPH will most likely be:
A. 35% lower than the multiple used to value a large minority interest in
TPH.
B. 54% lower than the multiple used to value a large minority interest in
TPH.
C. 32% lower than the multiple used to value a large minority interest in
TPH.
35. The control premium that Misek is assuming is closest to:
A. 18.90%.
B. 20.36%.
C. 41.67%.


36. The prior transaction method would be most appropriate for valuing:
A. Firm A.
B. Firm B.
C. Firm C.


Questions 37 through 42 relate to Alternative Investments
Commercial Equity REIT Case Scenario
Jon Olson, a financial expert, has worked in the investment industry for over fifteen years
as a research analyst and money manager. Over the years, Olson has gained substantial
knowledge of the workings of capital markets and has undergone extensive research in
many sectors of the global debt and equity markets. In his attempt to impart this
knowledge to emergent professionals in his field, Olson volunteered to offer his
specialized guidance to a group of young portfolio managers. The group was
predominantly interested in the valuation of alternative investments, especially public and
private real estate. To illustrate the appraisal of a REIT, Olson presented a case study of
Commercial Equity REIT (CER), with the property portfolio comprising of commercial
real estate in and around the state of Illinois. Exhibit 1 displays information that was part
of the case study.
Exhibit 1
Commercial Equity REIT (in thousands of US$ except growth rate)
Last year NOI $550,120
Expected growth in NOI 2.07%
NOI of comparable transactions 575,000
Average value of comparable property 5,950,000
Cash and accounts receivable 167,000
BV of land held for future development 45,000
MV of land held for future development 53,500
Goodwill 75,500
Total debt 1,450,000
Deferred tax liabilities 210,000
*The number of shares outstanding is 100,000 and the current market price for the REIT
is $32.89/share
As Olson talked about the performance of this REIT, he made the following comment:
“Value-oriented investors would be particularly interested in purchasing this REIT for

value-addition.”


Elaborating on the conceptual basis for the application of NAV-based measures to

determine appropriate investment decisions, Olson made the following comments:
Statement 1: “Investors may be willing to purchase a REIT trading at a premium to

NAV if the management team of the REIT has better opportunities to grow.
As such, the NAV approach implicitly incorporates the going concern
assumption and can be used to value a pool of assets.”
Statement 2: “NAV estimates become particularly useful when markets become illiquid
and public equity investors cannot ascribe an accurate value to businesses.
As such, the NAV reflects the value of a REIT’s assets to a private market
buyer.”
In addition to using NAV as a measure of valuation, Olson also mentioned other relative
value approaches to determine a REIT or REOC’s investment attractiveness. He stated
that price multiples based on FFO and AFFO were appropriate in determining a REIT
stock’s relative value. David Eubanks, one of the group participants, responded to the
discussion with the following question:
“How will the price multiples based on FFO and AFFO behave during economic
downturns? Also, how does a company’s capital structure affect these multiples?”
Eubanks answered with the following comment:
“Although the absolute value of multiples during downturns would be lower, relative
P/FFO and P/AFFO multiples could be higher. Also, since neither FFO nor AFFO take
into account differences in leverage, changing capital structures will not affect valuation
based on these multiples unless used in conjunction with effects of leverage levels.”
Olson then displayed the following exhibit to illustration the calculation of such
multiples.


Exhibit 2
Residential REIT Incorporated (in US$ thousands)
Gross rental revenue $889,450
Estimated vacancy and collection losses 75,650
Property taxes 64,000
Other operating expenses 145,000
Depreciation $55,000
General and administrative expenses $110,000

Maintenance type capital expenditures and
$41,000
leasing commissions
Non-recurring capital expenditures $76,000
Interest expense $23,000
Non-cash rent 53,000

*The market price of the REIT equals $67/share and the no. of shares outstanding is 100,000.
In conclusion, Olson talked about the discounted cash flow approach as it applied to the
valuation of REITs and REOCs. Olson used the example of a REIT with the underlying
portfolio including shopping centers and malls in the busiest areas of Minneapolis. To
explain the estimation of a suitable growth rate for the REIT, Olson stated that the REIT
would experience an increase in growth over the coming few years. He also presented the
following information:
• Leverage is expected to increase by 5-6% over the same period.

• Return from reinvestment is expected to increase by 1%.
• The percentage return from investment activity is also expected to increase by
1.5%.
In addition to the above, Olson included the following data in the analysis covering the
same time period:
1. The company reduced their estimate of depreciable lives, increasing the rate of
depreciation.
2. The going-in cap rates in the future would be slightly lower than the interest rates
on new loans.


3. The REIT is expected to undergo a repositioning of a material portion of its

portfolio into higher quality properties.
Olson then advised the group to go through the example and write their conclusions on a
piece of paper.
37. As reinforced by Olson, would value-oriented investors most likely be interested

in the commercial equity REIT under analysis?
A. Yes.
B. No, because companies planning IPOs and secondary offerings would be
interested in buying this REIT.
C. No, because sector-focused real estate investors, not value oriented
investors, would purchase this security.
38. Olson is most accurate with respect to:
A. Statement 1 only.
B. Both statements 1 and 2.
C. Neither statement 1 nor statement 2.
39. Will Olson’s answer with regards to price multiples most likely prove helpful to
Eubank?
A. Only with respect to economic downturns.

B. Neither with respect to economic downturns nor with respect to leverage
levels.
C. Both with respect to economic downturns and leverage levels.
40. Using the information provided in Exhibit 2, the P/FFO for the residential REIT is
closest to:
A. 12.50.
B. 14.20.
C. 16.07.


41. Using the information provided in Exhibit 2, the P/AFFO for the residential REIT
is closest to:
A. 15.16.
B. 17.73.
C. 22.20.
42. With respect to the shopping center REIT, which of the data provided by Olson is
least consistent with the estimated percentage changes provided earlier?
A. 2 only.
B. 1 and 2 only.
C. 2 and 3 only.


Questions 43 through 48 relate to Fixed Income
Ben Sloane Case Scenario
Ben Sloane works as a fixed-income analyst at PiperCoons& Associates (PCA), a U.S.

based financial firm established by two successful entrepreneurs, Michael Coons and
Duncan Piper. Sloan is assessing the credit quality of a few fixed income securities for
inclusion in an endowment fund assisting the health care industry. Due to the dependence
of its beneficiary on the income provided by the fund, Sloane planned to opt for
investments that were investment grade. To further his goal, Sloane read an article about
structural models used by credit rating agencies to assess the quality of corporate debt.
Illustrating the option analogy, the article made the following comments:
Comment 1: “According to the structural model, a company’s equity has the same
payoff as a European call option on the company’s assets with a strike price
equal to the face value of the company’s liabilities and a maturity equal to
the maturity of the company’s liabilities.”
Comment 2: “A company’s debt is equivalent to owning a riskless bond and going short
a European put option on the assets of the company. According to this debt
option analogy, the value of risky debt representing credit risk equals the
value of the sold insurance policy.”
Sloane needed to understand the model’s underlying assumptions and calculations to

accurately apply it to determine credit risk. To explicitly calculate the credit risk
measures, Sloane gathered information about a hypothetical company’s debt and assets.
Exhibits 1 and 2 display this information.
Exhibit 1
Hypothetical Company
Asset value $3,500
Expected return on assets 5.00%
Face value of debt $2,800
Time to maturity of debt 1 year
Risk-free rate 2.00%


Exhibit 2
N(-d1) 0.1050
N(-d2) 0.1562
N(-e1) 0.0875
N(-e2) 0.1350
Sloane used this information to estimate the credit risk measures for the company. He,
however, knew that the model’s underlying assumptions and their accuracy could greatly
affect the reliability of the calculated measures. He discussed the model’s weaknesses
and limitations with Michael Coons, one of the firm’s founders. Coons stated that the
computations under the structural model assumed that the debt and equity of a company
actively traded in the financial markets. He added that the calculations also depended on
observable variables like a company’s debt-to-equity ratio and asset return volatility.
Sloane agreed and stated that since the model used the riskless rate to discount future
cash flows, the present value of the credit loss did not accurately capture the risks of
those cash flows.
The conversation about the limitations of the structural model led Coons to talk about the
reduced form model. He stated that the credit risk measures for the hypothetical company
that Sloane was analyzing could also be determined using the reduced form model. Coons
provided the following additional information:
• Default intensity equals 0.04.

• Loss given default equals 45%.
Coons recommended Sloane to use the reduced form model to evaluate the securities’
credit risk. He stated that, theoretically, such models would perform better than credit
ratings and structural models due to the flexibility of their estimation procedures.
43. The article is most accurate with respect to:
A. Comment 1.
B. Comment 2.
C. both comments 1 and 2.


44. Assuming the data provided in Exhibits 1 and 2 is accurate, the present value of
the expected loss is closest to:
A. $56.05.
B. $55.19.
C. $61.20.
45. For the hypothetical company that Sloane is assessing, the:
A. risk premium dominates the time value discount.

B. time value discount dominates the risk premium.
C. risk premium balances the time value discount.
46. Do Coons and Sloane most likely capture the limitations of the structural model
accurately?
A. Only Coons does.

B. Only Sloane does.
C. Neither of them does.
47. Using the reduced form model, with regards to the hypothetical company, the:
A. time value of money is dominated by the risk premium.

B. probability of default over the life of the debt is 5.0%.
C. risk premium is dominated by the time value of money.
48. Coons preference of the credit risk analysis approach is most likely correct
because:
A. the reduced form model helps incorporate changes in the business cycle
regardless of the estimation approach of the model’s parameters; the
structural approach does not provide this flexibility.
B. Even though credit ratings provide a cardinal ranking, they are inherent
with a conflict between stability and accuracy.
C. In the event of default, reduced form models allow a company’s different
liabilities to have different loss rates.


Questions 49 through 54 relate to Fixed Income
RoseDeco Case Scenario
Matt Curtis, a research analyst, is writing a research report on Rosemary Decorations

(RoseDeco), an event planning firm that specializes in handling corporate events. Curtis
is assessing the growth potential of RoseDeco’s stock and the income stability of its debt
securities. To establish the default probability for RoseDeco, Curtis requested the credit
department at his firm to provide him with the inputs to the regression model for
estimating the firm’s one-year default probability. Exhibit 1 displays the information
supplied to Curtis.
Exhibit 1
Logistic Regression
Coefficient Name Coefficient Value Input Value
Alpha -3
B1 1.12 0.0787
B2 -2.30 0.0560
B3 0.981 0.8700
B4 -0.425 0.1530
Before issuing a buy recommendation for the firm’s fixed-income securities, Curtis
planned to use credit spreads to estimate the credit risk measures for RoseDeco to ensure
that investment risk is properly accounted for. Curtis is particularly interested in a 10%
coupon bond issued by RoseDeco. The bond pays semiannually and is expected to return
the $1,000 principal and the last coupon payment in five years. The risk-free zero-coupon
yield on U.S. bonds is 0.672%. Curtis has determined that the credit spread for this
payment equals 0.476%. Curtis is using this data to estimate the expected loss with
respect to the last payment on this bond.
After completing the research report, Curtis met with Ryan White, a close friend from
college. White was now a renowned financial analyst in the U.S. working for a well-
established investment firm. Curtis talked about credit analysis models and their strengths
and limitations. When White analyzed Curtis’s workings of credit risk measures he made
the following comment:


“The decomposition of the credit spread in either the structural or reduced form models
assumes that markets are frictionless. This means that in most practical applications, the
expected percentage loss, as measured by the models, will be less than the credit spread.”
White continued the conversation about credit risk with an elaboration of the credit
quality of structured bonds. He made the following comments:
“For an asset-backed security, if there is a default in the collateral pool, the probability of
default can be estimated using either a structural model or a reduced form model.
However, the calculations are much more complex.”
Mentioning his current assignments, White stated that he was analyzing a convertible
bond issued by Magneto Enterprises (MAGEN), a large-cap U.S. firm. Exhibit 2 displays
key facts about the bond.
Exhibit 2
Magneto Enterprises Convertible Bond
Current market price $1,135.4
Conversion ratio 33.67
Current dividend yield 4.50%
Coupon rate 9.89%
Stock price $28.5
White knew that a convertible bond could be viewed as having an embedded call option
on the stock of the issuing firm. When he talked about this option with Curtis, Curtis
posed the following question:
“I believe that the theoretical value of this call option could be determined using the
Black Scholes option pricing model. However, if I want to estimate a price for this option
without using complicated models, how can I achieve my goal?”
While reviewing White’s analysis, Curtis disagreed with a few of his estimations based
on the traditional analysis of the bond. He was especially concerned with White’s
estimate of downside risk. Curtis believed that, although White’s calculations were
accurate, his forecasts overstated this risk measure. To illustrate his calculations, Curtis
cited the example of W&E Corporation’s convertible bond that had a market price of
$122.67. The bond was an annual pay, 6.0% coupon bond with 7 years to maturity. The
bond was not callable but was putable and had a YTM equal to 4.5%. Curtis stated the
market provided key information about the value of this bond.


49. Using the information provided in Exhibit 1, the one-year probability of default
for RoseDeco is closest to:
A. 2.3%.
B. 3.9%.
C. 9.5%.
50. Assuming that today is January 1 2010, Curtis’s estimate of the present value of
the expected loss due to credit risk for RoseDeco’s five year bond should be
closest to:
A. $23.67.
B. $24.79.
C. $27.05.
51. With respect to his comments about credit spread and asset-backed securities, is
White most likely correct?
A. Yes.
B. Only with respect to credit spreads.
C. Only with respect to asset-backed securities.
52. The best response to Curtis’s question about the convertible bond is that the price
of the call option will be closest to:
A. $5.22.
B. $0.18.
C. $3.37.
53. Which of the following can be a possible explanation of Curtis’s belief of an

overstatement of White’s downside risk estimate with respect to Magneto’s
convertible bond?
A. Overestimating the rise in interest rates and issuer’s credit spread.

B. Underestimating the decline in interest rates and overestimating the
issuer’s credit spread.
C. Underestimating the decline in interest rates and issuer’s credit spread.


54. Using traditional analysis, which of the following is most accurate about W&E
Corporation’s convertible bond?
A. The market estimates the value of the embedded options to equal $17.89.
B. The value of the embedded options is approximately equal to $13.83,
given that interest rates remain constant.
C. Due to the conflicting effects of the embedded options, market
information cannot be used to determine an estimate of their value.


Questions 55 through 60 relate to Derivatives
Comfort Beddings and Furnishers Case Scenario
Justin Martinez is the corporate head of the risk management department at Comfort
Beddings and Furnishers (CB&F), a multinational chain with headquarters in Houston,
Texas. Under Martinez’s instructions, CB&F has engaged in a number of forward
contracts and commodity futures to hedge against rising raw material prices and changing
market conditions. Following the advice of his second in command, Peter Rabel,
Martinez is now planning to use options for risk management purposes. However, since
the workings of the options market is new to him, Martinez would like to understand how
options are valued using the binomial model. Rabel obtained information on two options
and presented it to Martinez for review. The exhibit below displays this information.
Exhibit
Option Contract Information
Market
Underlying Price of
Exercise Price at Up Down Risk-free Option at
Option Price ($) T = 0 ($) Movement Movement Rate (%) T= 0 ($)
Call 55.00 55.00 +20% - 25% 2.00 $10
Put 50.00 50.00 +30% - 55% 2.00 $8
Martinez was skeptical of the quoted prices of the abovementioned options. He decided
to utilize his knowledge of option-pricing to obtain a minimum price for each of the
options under analysis. For this, Martinez used a risk-free rate of 5.0% and assumed no
cash payments during the life of the options.
While conversing with Rabel about the estimates he generated, Martinez talked about the

time value inherent in each option. Knowing that options expire in the future, Martinez
was sure that each option holder held value in terms of the chances that the underlying
price would move in their favor over the life of the option. However, he was not sure how
this value differed for European and American options. Martinez used the options under
analysis to calculate the approximate difference in time value inherent in American
options versus European option.


When Martinez presented his results to Rabel for elaboration, Rabel agreed with most of
the conceptual underpinnings underlying his evaluation. However, Rabel stated that
assuming no cash flows during the options’ lives was a somewhat unrealistic assumption.
Rabel advised Martinez to alter this assumption and recalculate the option prices. After
the necessary modifications, Martinez formulated the following conclusions:
Conclusion 1: “The minimum prices for the European options would decrease but those
for American options would remain unchanged.”
Conclusion 2: “With cash flows, the value of an American call option will be greater
than the value of an identical European call option. However, the
relationship between a European put option and an identical American
put option will not change with the existence of cash flows.”
In addition to the above change, Rabel also expected the following changes in interest
rates and volatility trends:
• Interest rates were expected to increase significantly in the near future.

• Volatility in security prices was also expected to rise over the coming fiscal
year.
Intrigued with the results to his analysis, Martinez extended his research by including the
following options for further clarification:
Option: 1: “An embedded put option with a price of $9.07.”

Option 2: “A call option on a stock with a price of $7.05.”
Option 3: “A European put option on a stock with a price of $3.09.”
Martinez would like to expand his knowledge on options valuation and for this he has
undertaken a study of the Black-Scholes-Merton option pricing model. He begins his
study by taking the risk-free rates and underlying prices collected in the Exhibit and
assumes the following scenarios on T = 0 holding all else constant.
Assumption 1: The price of the stock underlying the call and put option increases to $56
and $53 respectively.
Assumption 2: The risk-free rate declines to 1.5%.


55. Which of the following statements is most likely accurate regarding the model
being used by Rabel and Martinez for call and put options?
A. The model is a complex model.

B. The model can be extended to price American options.
C. Underlying prices are assumed to follow a lognormal distribution.
56. Using a one-period binomial model, the call option (Exhibit) should sell for a
current price of:
A. $6.47.
B. $11.00.
C. $11.86.

57. Based on the information presented in the exhibit regarding the put option and
using a one-period binomial model, does an arbitrage opportunity exist to earn
riskless profits at T = 0 (assumeπu= 67% and πd= 33%)?
A. No.
B. Yes, the put option can be purchased in the market today.
C. Yes, the put option can be sold short in the market today.
58. Are Martinez’s conclusions most likely consistent with sound option pricing
theory?
A. Yes.
B. Only conclusion 1 is consistent.
C. Only conclusion 2 is consistent.
59. With respect to the additional options analyzed by Martinez, under the interest
rate assumption, the price increase will be highest for:
A. Option 1 and price decrease will be highest for Option 3.

B. Option 2 and the price decrease will be highest for either Option 1 or
Option 3.
C. Option 1 or Option 2, and the price decrease will be highest for Option 3.


60. Considering Assumption 1, which of the following scenarios is most likely correct
with respect to option deltas?
A. The call delta will move towards 0.0.

B. The call delta will increase towards 1.0.
C. The put delta will decrease towards –1.0.


CFA Level II Mock Exam 5 - Questions (AM)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CFA Level II Mock Exam 5 - Questions (AM)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CFA Level II Mock Exam 5 – Questions (AM)

Copyright © 2010-2016. FinQuiz.com. All rights reserved. Copying, reproduction

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com – 5th Mock Exam 2016 (AM Session)

Questions Topic Minutes

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

Questions 1 through 6 relate to Ethical and Professional Standards

Timothy Vaughn Case Scenario

Timothy Vaughn is a portfolio manager at Horizon Asset Management specializing in

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

2. Is Vaughn in violation of the CFA Institute Standards of Professional Conduct

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

A. suitability as it has led to inappropriate investment decisions.

4. Which of Vaughn’s departure preparations will most likely lead to a violation of

A. current clients only.

5. In context of the justifications provided by the research analyst, which of the

A. Uphold integrity in the workplace and act in a respectful manner towards

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

Questions 7 through 12 relate to Quantitative Methods

Capital Management and Statistical Service Providers Case Scenario

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

Comment 3: “Assuming a single independent variable, a smaller sample size would be

In addition to the above conclusions, Tracy also stated the following:

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

9. Cronin is most accurate with respect to:

10. Cronin is most accurate with respect to:

A. Only with respect to Points 1 and 3.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

Questions 13 through 18 relate to Financial Reporting and Analysis

Investa-Corp Service Providers Case Scenario

Investa-Corp Service Providers (ICSP) is a financial advisory firm established to

Ending Projected Benefit Obligation $5,520

Beginning plan assets 1,555

Ending plan assets 2,905

Employer Contributions 950

Payments to retirees 1,120

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

As of December 31, 2007, the firm had approximately $220

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

Total assets 2,500 3,400

Total liabilities 1,450 2,333

Revaluation surplus - 275

Depreciation expense 250 310

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

A. Yes, and the total periodic pension cost is $95 million.

15. Gunn is most accurate with respect to:

A. $14,270 under U.S. GAAP and $14,270 under IFRS.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

A. Only Gunn is correct.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

Questions 19 through 24 relate to Financial Reporting and Analysis

Portico Enterprises Case Scenario

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

He continued with the following comment:

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

Net income 2012 1,600,000

Excess purchase price attributable 50,000

19. Cross is most accurate with respect to:

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

21. If PENT’s investment in ADCL was initially recognized as either held-to-maturity

A. The amount of realized gain under held-to-maturity would be $135,506,

FinQuiz.com © 2016 -­ All rights reserved.

Questions 25 through 30 relate to Equity Investments

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.

FinQuiz.com © 2016 - All rights reserved.