注册 登录
上一主题：What to Expect from Quant Section?
下一主题：exam format
返回列表 发帖
Bad5shah

Rank: 3Rank: 3

UID
223238 
帖子
260 
主题
135 
注册时间
2011-7-11 
最后登录
2013-8-22 
1# 跳转到 » 倒序看帖
打印
tT
发表于 2011-7-11 17:46 | 只看该作者
Which of the following statements about the internal rate of return (IRR) for a project with the following cash flow pattern is CORRECT?

Year 0: -$ 2,000
Year 1: $10,000
Year 2: -$ 10,000

A) It has two IRRs of approximately 38% and 260%.

B) No IRRs can be calculated.

C) It has a single IRR of approximately 38%.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The number of IRRs equals the number of changes in the sign of the cash flow. In this case, from negative to positive and then back to negative. Although 38% seems appropriate, one should not automatically discount the value of 260%.

Check answers by calculation:

10,000

 

相关主题：

. Reading 43: Residual Income Valuation-LOS k 习题精选

. Schweser Concept Checker

. [ 2009 FRM Sample Exam ] Investment Management Q5

. 求助：09年的一道题

. Corporate Finance Question

收藏 分享

hariRaj

Rank: 3Rank: 3

UID
223329 
帖子
304 
主题
136 
注册时间
2011-7-11 
最后登录
2013-9-27 
2#
发表于 2011-7-11 17:46 | 只看该作者
hi,

i don't really understand why you're having a problem here since you say: "Both discount rates give NPVs of approximately zero and thus, are IRRs. " and thus have solved the question already.

there are no several NPVs but IRRs in this case.
you are right, for each change of the sign of the CFs there may be one possible IRR, but thus must not be the case all the time... meaning you can have a non-normal CF pattern with only one IRR.

answer c is a "trick answer". inuputting the values in your calculator CF sheet will yield IRR of 38%. BUT, because of the change of signs, you should check for the other IRR that is given (260%) as well.

a quick way to check this: -2000 + 10000/3.6 -10000/3.6^2 = 6.1728
for this question this is close enough to zero (note that the question asks for the approximate IRRs). the second "real" IRR will be above 260%.

alternatively, after typing in the values in the CF sheet of your calculator (TI BA II+ in my case), you could just hit the npv button instead of the irr button, enter i=260%, and compute IRR. this will yield the same result.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at Friday, May 7, 2010 at 08:11AM by chefe_.

TOP

ajpheif16

Rank: 2

UID
223320 
帖子
236 
主题
121 
注册时间
2011-7-11 
最后登录
2013-9-9 
3#
发表于 2011-7-11 17:46 | 只看该作者
I agree with Soddy1979 - you don't even need a calculator for this one. If there are unconventional cash flows, i.e. more than one cash OUT flow, there will be more than 1 IRR. There may be a question related to the "problems of IRR" related to this also.

TOP

manasib

Rank: 2

UID
223286 
帖子
212 
主题
93 
注册时间
2011-7-11 
最后登录
2016-4-21 
4#
发表于 2011-7-11 17:46 | 只看该作者
soddy1979 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> [...]
>
> Basically, if you have unconventional cash flows
> (ie. not an outflow followed by an inflow) you
> will have multiple IRR's.
>
> Once you understand this, you can automatically
> discount C & B.

no, not automatically. if there is an unconventional CF pattern, there MIGHT be several IRRs (possibly one for each change in signs) but this is not a MUST.

> The only way you could ever have no IRR would be
> if you had an outflow only. Then your return would
> be zero percent. That's B gone.

don't you think that your return would be -100%?

about the relevance of finding a possibly additional IRR:
ok, let me rephrase:

it is possible with your calc to find it, sure... but what is the benefit? to show that you can calculate NPVs with a range of different rates and see which one brings NPV closest to zero? the concept is important, but i rather think, that if a question related to several IRRs is posed, than

- either you'll have some direction on in what range to start iterating (like in the description of the question above),
- it is obvious for some reason what the IRR must be, or
- it will be a conceptual question without calcs

TOP

JoeyDVivre

Rank: 2

UID
223331 
帖子
289 
主题
53 
注册时间
2011-7-11 
最后登录
2014-2-27 
5#
发表于 2011-7-11 17:46 | 只看该作者
chefe_ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> soddy1979 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------

> > The only way you could ever have no IRR would
> be
> > if you had an outflow only. Then your return
> would
> > be zero percent. That's B gone.
>
> don't you think that your return would be -100%?

Sorry I should have said this is indeterminate (ie it's not -100% or 0%). It still means there is no IRR though. However, as the question has multiple cash flows it still rules out B.

I stand corrected on this, but I thought the number of IRRs was the same as the number of changes in cash flow direction. I didn't think this was ambiguous.

This is definitely a conceptual question though.

TOP

waldziuchna

Rank: 2

UID
223267 
帖子
271 
主题
117 
注册时间
2011-7-11 
最后登录
2013-8-19 
6#
发表于 2011-7-11 17:46 | 只看该作者
thank you for all the input everyone! definitely helped a lot!

TOP

返回列表
上一主题：What to Expect from Quant Section?
下一主题：exam format