|
- UID
- 222295
- 帖子
- 348
- 主题
- 4
- 注册时间
- 2011-7-2
- 最后登录
- 2014-6-29
|
5#
发表于 2011-7-13 13:30
| 只看该作者
Mr.Anderson Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Paraguay Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > FinNinja Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > I got 4.393% but that's just based on CF
> > analysis
> > >
> > > 25.25 + 25 - 5 = 45.25 / 1030 = 4.393%
> > >
> > > do we have to adjust for BEY? I know this is
> > how
> > > they are generally quoted, but when
> calculating
> > > total return wouldn't the actual total return
> > be
> > > more accurate?
> >
> > A lot of the Schweser questions used to ask for
> > BEY.
> >
> > This used to be a very large portion of the
> fixed
> > income section so a lot of the Schweser
> material
> > leaves this as legacy.
> >
> > It is literally a single blue box now.
>
>
> Paraguay is actually correct! It was a CFAI
> question.
> However, what I am struggling with is why is the
> BEY the total return? I thought the EAR is the
> total return which would be 4.39 ?
> In SS9, p.49 Q8, Schweser asks for the "total
> effective return" which in their guideline answer
> is the effective annual return (EAR).
>
> Any explanations gentlemen?
Old convention from before we all had bloomberg terminals and tradeweb.
BEY used to be the only way to quote a bond that people could understand. |
|
