标题: Reading 32: International Equity Benchmarks－LOS a [打印本页]
作者: tycoon 时间: 2008-9-16 11:03 标题: [2008] Session 10－Reading 32: International Equity Benchmarks－LOS a
CFA Institute Area 8-11, 13: Asset Valuation
Session 10: Equity Portfolio Management
Reading 32: International Equity Benchmarks
LOS a: Discuss the need for float adjustment in the construction of international equity benchmarks.
作者: tycoon 时间: 2008-9-16 11:04
Which of the following is a valid reason for the need for float adjustment in the construction of international equity benchmarks as compared to US equity benchmarks?
| A) | The proportion of free float of market capitalization is higher for international equity benchmarks as compared to US equity benchmarks. |
|
| B) | The crossholding of the benchmark in the US is higher than the crossholding in international markets. |
|
| C) | The crossholding of the benchmark in the US is lower than the crossholding in international markets. |
|
D) | The proportion of free float of market capitalization is lower for international equity benchmarks as compared to US equity benchmarks. |
|
Answer and Explanation
The proportion of free float (amount of shares actually available for trading) is lower for international equity markets necessitating float adjustment. Crossholdings of company shares (not the benchmark) is one factor contributing to lower float in international markets.
作者: tycoon 时间: 2008-9-16 11:04
Float adjustment is needed for international equity benchmarks because the international equity indices are:
| A) | float weighted and the float is lower due to cross-holdings. |
|
| B) | market cap weighted and the float is higher due to cross-holdings. |
|
C) | market cap weighted and the float is lower due to cross-holdings. |
|
| D) | float weighted and the float is higher due to cross-holdings. |
|
Answer and Explanation
International equity benchmarks (and most US benchmarks) are market-cap weighted, however, the proportion of the float for international equity benchmarks is lower, meaning less shares are available for trading. One of the key reasons for the lack of float is a large amount of cross-holding of shares among companies. For example, if one firm holds a controlling interest in another, those shares held are not available for trading.
[此贴子已经被作者于2008-9-18 17:36:20编辑过]
作者: tycoon 时间: 2008-9-16 11:05
Market cap weighted indices as compared to float adjusted indices give:
| A) | lower weight to higher float companies with large cross-holdings of shares. |
|
| B) | higher weight to lower float companies with small cross-holdings of shares. |
|
C) | higher weight to lower float companies with large cross-holdings of shares. |
|
| D) | lower weight to higher float companies with small cross-holdings of shares. |
|
Answer and Explanation
Market cap weighted indices weigh companies based on market cap and not float. Those companies that have lower float would then get higher weight when the index is market cap weighted and not adjusted for float. Lower float is caused by large cross-holdings of shares (among other things).
作者: tycoon 时间: 2008-9-16 11:07
A small, developing country has just developed an organized stock exchange where several dozen firms of all sizes trade. Craig Aversa has gathered data for the companies on the exchange and plans to construct an index using a sample of the firms that he feels are representative of the stocks that trade on the exchange and the countrys economy. He meets with Jamie Weir who has experience in creating country indexes. As they begin, Aversa says that he will develop a strict set of guidelines for determining which firms to include in the index. Weir says that the guidelines should be published so that the index may be used more effectively and efficiently as a trading tool.
As Aversa does his research, he uncovers some issues that may lead to potential problems. Many of the firms that are traded on the exchange and would be good candidates for inclusion in the index have large positions that are owned by a controlling family and will probably not be actively traded for the foreseeable future. Several of the firms own positions, ranging from 5 to 20 percent, of another company on the exchange. When Weir proposes the creation of a value-weighted index based upon capitalization, Aversa says that such an index may have weights that are not representative of the actual value of the shares in the companies that are available for trading. Weir acknowledges Aversas concerns and computes a float adjustment that will increase the value of shares trading for each company to better reflect their tradable value. Aversa decides to construct the index using 10 firms. For the index, Aversa decides to use the firm with the largest capitalization from each of the four major industries in the country. He will then rank the remaining firms by size and choose the six firms with the largest capitalization from that list. In so doing, he feels that he is striking an appropriate balance. One advantage of this method is that it turns out the gap, in terms of capitalization, between the sixth firm on the second list and the seventh firm, is fairly large. Thus, Aversa feels the criteria for selection will minimize the likelihood that the component firms in the index will have to change in the near future.
Weir says that Aversa may still need to monitor the amount of the float adjustment. Aversa says he plans to employ a precise float adjustment. Weir says it may be more practical to create acceptable ranges for the stocks that approximate the true free float. As long as the free float is within the band, they will not adjust the index. With respect to their approach to creating the guidelines:
A) | Aversa is proposing objectivity and Weir is proposing transparency. |
|
| B) | Weir is proposing judgment and Aversa is proposing transparency. |
|
| C) | Weir is proposing objectivity and Aversa is proposing transparency. |
|
| D) | Aversa is proposing breadth and Weir is proposing judgment. |
|
Answer and Explanation
Aversas plan to set up strict guidelines imposes objectivity. It removes subjective judgment from the process of maintaining the index. Weir is proposing transparency in that she wants those who use the index to be informed as to the criteria for the index and under what conditions it might change.
Among the potential problems that Aversa discovered is:
Answer and Explanation
The fact that many of the firms on the exchange own shares of the other firms presents a problem in measuring the free float. Such ownership is called cross holding.
With respect to Aversas concern about problems of using a value-weighted index and Weirs solution: | A) | Aversas concern is unjustified, and Weirs solution is unwarranted. |
|
B) | Aversas concern is justified, but Weirs solution is wrong. |
|
| C) | Aversas concern is justified, and Weirs solution is appropriate. |
|
| D) | Aversas concern is unjustified, but Weirs solution is warranted. |
|
Answer and Explanation
Aversa is correct in his assertion that there could be problems in assigning correct weights to the stocks in the index. This is because the cross ownership and the large amount of closely held stock will mean the free float for any given issue is less than the reported capitalization. Float adjustments should be applied to each stock to get a better idea of the free float for each issue, and they should use those measures for the portfolio weights. Weirs solution is wrong, however, in that a float adjustment should decrease the value of the float of each issue where cross holding is a problem and not increase it.
In determining his criteria for the number of firms to select based upon size, Aversa is striking a balance between: | A) | liquidity and crossing opportunities. |
|
B) | breadth and investability. |
|
| C) | breadth and crossing opportunities. |
|
| D) | objectivity and judgment. |
|
Answer and Explanation
Including only the largest firms increases investability. It avoids including small, closely held firms for which obtaining stock to replicate the index may be difficult. However, using only a few large firms will reduce the breadth of the index and make it less representative of the stocks that trade in the country and on the exchange. This is classic choice that the creator of an index must consider.
If Aversas assessment that the component firms in his index will probably not change in the near future is CORRECT: | A) | there will be lower float adjustment effects. |
|
| B) | more judgment will be required in maintaining the index. |
|
| C) | there will be more breadth. |
|
D) | there will be lower index reconstitution effects. |
|
Answer and Explanation
This is true by definition. If the makeup of the index remains constant, then the users of the index will have lower costs in using the index as a benchmark. These costs are part of the reconstitution effects.
With respect to Aversas proposal for rebalancing and Weirs suggestion, Aversas proposal will lead to: | A) | high transactions costs, but Weirs suggestion is not a practical solution. |
|
B) | high transactions costs, and Weirs suggestion is a practical solution. |
|
| C) | low transactions costs, so Weirs suggestion is not relevant. |
|
| D) | low transactions costs, and Weirs suggestion would increase transactions costs. |
|
Answer and Explanation
In creating and managing an index, there is a tradeoff between how precisely to adjust the float. Precise float adjustment results in frequent rebalancing with the accompanying high transaction costs for portfolios tracking the index. Instead of making precise float adjustments, an index may use a band adjustment. In this case, the managers will create ranges that they feel capture the true percentage of the firms market cap that is free floating (e.g. 65% to 85%). As long as the firms estimated free float stays within that band, they do not adjust the firms weight in the index.
| 欢迎光临 CFA论坛 (http://forum.theanalystspace.com/) |
Powered by Discuz! 7.2 |