周教授CFA金融课程(2019年CFA一级全系列课程)

申请CFA一级会员免费学习、免费延期、直至通过考试。

周教授CFA金融课程(2019年CFA二级全系列课程)

申请CFA二级会员免费学习、免费延期、直至通过考试。

周教授CFA金融课程:考点精讲+作答须知(2019年CFA三级全系列课程)

全球最好CFA三级课程,由美国大学金融学资深教授,博士,CFA 持证人、博士生导师 - 周教授亲自授课,中国知名大学教授、硕博团队协作出品,通过率95%以上

 

CFA报名详细流程图,CFA考生自己即可完成报名
上一主题:Ethical and Professional Standards 【Reading 6】Sample
下一主题:Ethical and Professional Standards 【Reading 4】Sample
返回列表 发帖
周教授CFA金融课程:2019年CFA一二三级系列课程

Ethical and Professional Standards 【Reading 5】Sample

Glenarm Case Study (Refer to CFA Institute Standards of Practice Casebook for details.)
Peter Sherman, CFA, has recently joined Glenarm Company after spending 5 years at Pearl Investment Management. He is responsible for identifying potential Latin American investments. Previously, Sherman held jobs as consultant for many Latin American companies and had plans to continue such consulting jobs without disclosing anything to Glenarm.
After resigning, but before leaving his employment at Pearl, Sherman had encouraged Pearl customers to move their accounts to Glenarm. He contacted accounts Pearl had been soliciting for business. He also contacted potential clients that Pearl had rejected in the past as too small or incompatible with the firm's business. Furthermore, he convinced several of Pearl's clients and prospects to hire Glenarm after he joined the company. He also identified materials from Pearl to take with him, such as:
  • sample marketing presentations he had prepared
  • computer program models for stock selection
  • research materials on companies he had been following
  • a list of companies recommended by Sherman for potential investment, but which were rejected by Pearl
  • news articles for potential research ideas

Upon Sherman's joining Glenarm, which of the following acts did NOT violate the standards?
A)
He misappropriated news articles from his old employer.
B)
He did not give Glenarm a written statement disclosing his independent consulting practice and details of activities that resulted in compensation since they had already been approved by Pearl-his previous employer.
C)
He allowed Glenarm to advertise the fact that they had hired a portfolio manager who was a CFA charterholder.



Dissemination of Sherman's CFA credentials as a portfolio manager is not a violation as long as Standard VII(B) is adhered to. Others are incorrect because: Independent consulting without employer's consent is a violation of Standard IV(B), Additional Compensation Arrangements, Standard VI(A), Disclosure of Conflicts, Standard I(B), Independence and Objectivity, and Standard IV(A), Loyalty to Employer. Misappropriation of employer property and soliciting Pearl’s clients while still employed are also violations of Standard IV(A), Loyalty to Employer.

Alpha Asset Management manages portfolios for clients with more than $10 million in assets. Bob Smith, a portfolio manager at Alpha, is planning to leave Alpha to set up company Beta Investment Management, to focus exclusively on clients with less than $10 million in assets. While he is still employed at Alpha, Smith begins to solicit (on his own time) potential clients with less than $10 million in assets – clients that Alpha has previously rejected for being too small. According to the Standards of Professional Conduct IV(A) related to duties to employer, Smith’s solicitation of these clients is:
A)
unacceptable as he may not engage in any activities to go into business while he is still employed by Alpha.
B)
unacceptable since the fact the Beta will not be in competition with Alpha is irrelevant.
C)
acceptable as he is not in competition with his current employer.



It is acceptable for Smith to solicit clients for his new employer on his own time as long as he is not in any way competing with his employer. Standard IV(A) prohibits only actions that have the potential to cause harm to Smith’s employer.

TOP

Glenarm Case Study (Refer to CFA Institute's Standards of Practice Casebook for details.)
Peter Sherman, CFA, has recently joined Glenarm Company after spending 5 years at Pearl Investment Management. He is responsible for identifying potential Latin American investments. Previously, Sherman held jobs as consultant for many Latin American companies and had plans to continue such consulting jobs without disclosing anything to Glenarm.
After resigning, but before leaving his employment at Pearl, Sherman had encouraged Pearl customers to move their accounts to Glenarm. He contacted accounts Pearl had been soliciting for business. He also contacted potential clients that Pearl had rejected in the past as too small or incompatible with the firm's business. Furthermore, he convinced several of Pearl's clients and prospects to hire Glenarm after he joined the company. He also identified materials from Pearl to take with him, such as:
  • sample marketing presentations he had prepared
  • computer program models for stock selection
  • research materials on companies he had been following
  • a list of companies recommended by Sherman for potential investment, but which were rejected by Pearl
  • news articles for potential research ideas
Under the obligation to act in the best interest of the employer while still an employee, Sherman's actions constitute the following violations except:
A)
solicitation of potential clients of Pearl--violation of Standard IV(A).
B)
leaving Pearl to join a possible competitor--violation of Standard IV(A), Loyalty to Employer.
C)
solicitation of clients while still employed by Pearl--violation of Standard IV(A).



There is no violation if the member joins a competitor without compromising his duty to his previous employer.

Others are incorrect because: Soliciting clients of Pearl, while in its employment, damaged Pearl's business, a clear violation of Standard IV(A); solicitation of potential clients is a violation for the same reason; it is a violation of Standard IV(A) to misappropriate employer's property which results in a damage to employer's business.

TOP

Glenarm Case Study (Refer to CFA Institute Standards of Practice Casebook for details.)
Peter Sherman, CFA, has recently joined Glenarm Company after spending 5 years at Pearl Investment Management. He is responsible for identifying potential Latin American investments. Previously, Sherman held jobs as a consultant for many Latin American companies and had plans to continue such consulting jobs without disclosing anything to Glenarm.
After resigning, but before leaving his employment at Pearl, Sherman had encouraged Pearl customers to move their accounts to Glenarm. He contacted accounts Pearl had been soliciting for business. He also contacted potential clients that Pearl had rejected in the past as too small or incompatible with the firm's business. Furthermore, he convinced several of Pearl's clients and prospects to hire Glenarm after he joined Glenarm. He also identified materials from Pearl to take with him, such as:
  • Sample marketing presentations he had prepared.
  • Computer program models for stock selection.
  • Research materials on companies he had been following.
  • A list of companies recommended by Sherman for potential investment which were rejected by Pearl.
  • News articles for potential research ideas.
Which of the following statements concerning Sherman's actions is CORRECT?
A)
Sherman did not violate any Standard by taking away the news articles from his previous employer, Pearl, for potential research ideas.
B)
Sherman did not violate Standard IV(A) since members can engage in independent consulting practice as long as their employer policy does not specifically prohibit it.
C)
Sherman did not violate Standard IV(A) by soliciting clients that were rejected by Pearl either because they were too small or unsuitable as long as winning their business did not adversely affect Pearl.


Standard IV(A) addresses Loyalty to the Employer and depriving the employer of profit opportunities is a violation of this standard. Because Pearl had no interest in rejected clients and had turned their profit potential down already, soliciting them is not a violation.
Taking away news articles and computer program models is a violation of Standard IV(A) because Sherman took away employer property, which could be used by Pearl or Sherman's replacement. Engaging in independent consulting practice is a violation IV(A) because Sherman not only compromised his independence and objectivity, but also did not obtain explicit written consent of his new employer, Standard IV(B), Additional Compensation Arrangements.


Sherman's attempt to lure away clients from Pearl while he was still employed at Pearl is:
A)
not a violation of Standard V(A) because it was conducted "after hours" on Sherman's own time.
B)
a violation of Standard IV(A) because it undermined Pearl's business and its profit opportunities and caused damage to Pearl's business.
C)
not a violation of Standard IV(A) because they would have followed Sherman to his new firm anyway, and no harm to Pearl was done as a result.


An attempt, successful or not, to lure away existing clients of the current employer is a violation of Standard IV(A) as it causes damage to the employer's business.
Others are incorrect because: "After hours" solicitation is not an excuse if it damages the employer's business; the fact that Pearl's clients were agreeable does not absolve Sherman of Standard IV(A) violation; even if Pearl's clients would have followed Sherman to his new employer anyway, Sherman, by soliciting such clients, damaged his employer's business. The focus is on Sherman's actions.

TOP

Jacques Claudel, a CFA Institute member, represents Vector Funds, a U.S.-based fund manager, in Canada. Although Vector Funds is properly licensed to deal in all Canadian and U.S. securities, its primary objective is to sell United States funds to Canadian institutional investors seeking diversification into the U.S. dollar. While it would be willing to do so if requested by its clients, Vector has not placed trades in Canadian securities since Claudel began working there two years ago.

Prior to joining Vector's Canadian operations, Claudel was an independent asset manager handling the funds of wealthy individuals and small institutions. Most of these accounts remain under his management, under the business name Coup de Gras. Claudel is unclear as to whether his consulting work is in competition with his new employer, as the accounts under his management are invested strictly in Canadian securities, while Vector has not traded Canadian securities. However, just to be on the safe side, he obtained written permission from Vector to continue serving his former clients. His former clients were not notified.

Claudel receives cash compensation for most of the accounts he handles independently, but for one he receives a new car for his personal use every two years, and for another he is compensated with a one-week, expenses-paid holiday in the European country of his choice.

As part of his responsibility, Claudel makes trades for some of his Canadian clients. He runs all of his trades through two brokers, Ace Equity Traders and the Parlay Group. Ace offers some of the best research available on health-care stocks, but charges fairly hefty commissions. Parley has some of the cheapest commissions in Toronto, but provides no research of value to Claudel. Vector claims compliance with the CFA Institute Soft Dollar Standards.

Henri Bonnet, CFA, a friend of Claudel’s, works on the floor of the Vancouver Stock Exchange. He asks Claudel to establish an account for him at Coup de Gras. Claudel learns that it is Bonnet's intention to manipulate the prices of penny stocks he trades on the exchange, and profit from the price movements in the account at Coup de Gras. Claudel sets up the account, but advises Bonnet that he "will have nothing to do" with the manipulation scheme beyond placing trades as Bonnet directs.

Claudel is currently pursuing a master's degree in financial economics in the evenings. During the interview with Vector and on his resume he indicated that he "attended Victoria University," giving his estimated date of graduation. He is not sure whether Vector understood that he did not have his master's degree.
Which of the following statements about consulting work is CORRECT?
A)
In all cases the employee must receive the employer's written permission prior to receiving additional compensation from parties other than the firm. This requirement applies to both monetary and non-monetary compensation.
B)
In some circumstances the employee must receive the employer's written permission prior to receiving additional compensation from parties other than the firm. This requirement applies to both monetary and non-monetary compensation.
C)
In some circumstances the employee must receive the employer's written permission prior to receiving additional compensation from parties other than the firm. This requirement applies to monetary compensation only.



Standard IV(A): Loyalty to Employer requires written permission from both the employer and the consulting customer if the work involves competition with the employer. An example of an instance not requiring permission would be if a CFA charterholder who works for a broker wishes to write grants for a nonprofit foundation. In such case, he need not get permission, nor does he need to disclose the compensation. This Standard applies for work that provides either monetary or nonmonetary compensation. (Study Session 2, LOS 5.b)

Should Claudel decide to terminate his relationship with Vector, which of the following items can he NOT take with him?
A)
A list of consulting clients, with addresses and phone numbers.
B)
His Rolodex full of contacts in the brokerage and money-management business.
C)
A marketing presentation he developed for Vector, but uses primarily in his side business.



Marketing presentations and any other materials developed for an employer belong to the employer, not the employee, according to Standard IV(A): Loyalty to Employer. The fact that Claudel was already using the marketing presentation on his own in defiance of the Standard does not make it OK for him to take the presentation when he leaves. The rest of the items are Claudel’s personal property. (Study Session 2, LOS 5.b)

Claudel's statement about his education background is:
A)
truthful, but not in accord with the Code and Standards.
B)
not truthful, and not in accord with the Code and Standards.
C)
truthful, and in accord with the Code and Standards.



Standard I(C) Misrepresentation states that "members shall not make any statements, orally or in writing, that misrepresent the member's academic or professional credentials." In this case, Claudel's statements are truthful, and are not a violation of the Standard. He could have been more clear, but what he said is undeniably correct. Whether Vector understood what he told them is not his problem, as long as he was truthful and did not attempt to deceive them. (Study Session 1, LOS 2.a)

Which of the following statements is CORRECT?
A)
Bonnet has violated Standard III(B): Fair Dealing, and Claudel has violated Standard I(B): Independence and Objectivity.
B)
Bonnet has violated Standard IV(A): Loyalty to Employer, and Claudel has violated Standard I(A): Knowledge of the Law.
C)
Bonnet has violated Standard II(A): Material Nonpublic Information, and Claudel has not violated Standard III(A): Loyalty, Prudence, and Care.



Bonnet violated several Standards, including IV(A) and II(B), by manipulating stock prices and profiting from that manipulation at the expense of other purchasers. Standard IV(A) requires that employees not act to injure the firm or deprive it of profits, and Bonnet’s personal trading and market manipulation crosses well over that line. However, Bonnet did not violate Standard II(A) Material Nonpublic Information because no nonpublic information was involved. Claudel violated Standard I(A) by contributing to Bonnet’s plans to break the law. Under the Code and Standards, Claudel cannot knowingly assist others who are violating the Standards or the law, even if he does not profit personally. While Claudel’s ethics are in question, nothing he did for Bonnet is likely to affect his independence, and he did not violate Standard I(B) Independence and Objectivity. (Study Session 2, LOS 5.b)

With regard to his consulting work, Claudel is:
A)
in competition with Vector because he advises individual investors, and not in compliance with the Code and Standards.
B)
in competition with Vector because he advises individual investors, and in compliance with the Code and Standards.
C)
not in competition with Vector because Vector doesn’t trade Canadian securities, and in compliance with the Code and Standards.



Since Vector both possesses the capability and the willingness to trade in Canadian securities, Claudel’s activities clearly put him in competition with his employer. He has received permission from his employer to consult, but has not received permission from his consulting clients to take a job. As such, Claudel is not in compliance with the Code and Standards, as they require written permission from both parties. (Study Session 2, LOS 7.b)

Assuming that both Ace Equity Traders and the Parlay Group offer best execution, Claudel:
A)
must disclose to clients whether client-directed brokerage will prevent him from getting the best execution.
B)
must direct all the trades for clients who do not wish to own health-care stocks to the Parlay Group.
C)
can select the broker that refers the most business back to him, as long as any research purchased benefits the client whose account is being traded.



The Standards require that purchased brokerage directly benefits the client. Clients who do not hold health-care stocks get no benefit from Ace’s research, so Claudel is obligated to send their trades to the broker with the lowest transaction costs. While disclosing the risks of client-directed brokerage is a good idea, it is only recommended, not required, in the Soft Dollar Standards. Referrals can play no part in the broker-selection process. The Standards require the investment manager to keep all the records required to demonstrate compliance with the Standards – the broker’s recordkeeping prowess is not relevant. (Study Session 1, LOS 3.b)

TOP

Jim Jones is an equity research analyst at Gamma funds. Because of his expertise in the telecommunications field, a Chinese telecommunications provider hires Jones as a consultant to help them identify potential investors. According to the Standards of Professional Conduct IV(A) related to duties to employer, Jones must:
A)
refuse this consulting arrangement.
B)
obtain verbal permission from his employer to engage in this consulting arrangement.
C)
describe to his employer in detail the activities related to this consulting arrangement.



According to the Standards of Professional Conduct, Jones must disclose to his employer all outside compensation arrangements, describe to his employer in detail the activities that give rise to outside compensation, and obtain written permission from his employer in advance.

TOP

返回列表
上一主题:Ethical and Professional Standards 【Reading 6】Sample
下一主题:Ethical and Professional Standards 【Reading 4】Sample