- UID
- 222255
- 帖子
- 263
- 主题
- 68
- 注册时间
- 2011-7-2
- 最后登录
- 2014-6-28
|
Easy Foundation/Endowment returns Q
So, if you are not told to use "compound" return, how do you know when it is appropriate to use additive, versus multiplicative returns.... eg. if you are given 5% spend rate, 2% inflation, 2% mgmt expenses, how do you know if the answer is 9%, or [(1.05)(1.02)(1.02)]-1 = 9.242%
Normally it is an insignificant difference, but I just did a practice test where they have you pick an appropriate asset allocation, and the two that have the best sharp both have a return that is right on the border, it would be met if you use additive but not if you use multiplicative. The answer ended up being the allocation that had the higher return, as it referenced multiplicative return requirement (though the question never stated anywhere to "compound" or anything of the sort)
On a separate topic, has anybody found the Schweser practice exams exceedingly difficult and very narrowly focused? On the past lvl 1 and lvl 2, if you took a practice test you covered most of the curriculum, however on this one, at least for Schweser, they go off into the weeds and create entire essays over very narrow topic ranges (eg adjusting WACC for pension assets was a 3 page essay). The end result is that even after a full test, morning and afternoon, you may have covered still a very small portion of the curriculum. Maybe this is how the real thing is, i don't know, but i just can't imagine being grilled over a topic that is suppose to have such small representation to the extent they do.... i can't count the number of times an entire essay revolves around "listing due diligence items for hedge funds, or private equity", or describing freaking advantages and disadvantages of NCREIF real estate benchmark versus NAREIT....... |
|