LO 1b Exam Patterns & Answer Frameworks
วิเคราะห์ pattern ของข้อสอบเก่า, answer template, และจุดพลาดที่เจอบ่อยใน LO 1b (Equity & Alternative Investments) อิงจากข้อสอบ Fall 2020 ถึง Fall 2024 นะ
1. การกระจายตัวของ Question Pattern
| Pattern | ความถี่ | ตัวอย่าง |
|---|---|---|
| Compare / Contrast | เจอบ่อยสุด | VC vs. LBO (S2023 Q12f), LBO risk vs. VC (S2024 Q4a), REIT NAVs vs. share prices (F2024 Q13c) |
| Describe / Explain Framework | เจอบ่อย | J-Curve (F2022 Q11b), 4-Quadrant Model (S2022 Q2a), PE fee structure (S2021 Q4b) |
| Assess / Recommend | เจอบ่อย | LBO candidate assessment (S2024 Q4b), HF strategy recommendation (F2023 Q2b), PE suitability (S2021 Q4a), REIT recommendation (F2025 Q2f) |
| Evaluate / Critique Statement | เจอบ่อย (ใหม่) | CEO momentum critique (F2025 Q2d), CEO OCC critique (F2025 Q2e) |
| Analyze Risks / Issues | กลาง ๆ | Young VC fund concerns (F2022 Q11a), Why VCs aren’t passive (F2023 Q1a) |
| Calculate | เป็น sub-part | LBO compounded return (S2023 Q12b), VC total compensation (F2023 Q1b), REIT NAV & differential (F2025 Q2b) |
2. Answer Templates
Template 1: “Assess/Recommend an LBO Candidate”
อิงจาก pattern S2024 Q4b
โครงสร้าง:
- บอก Framework ก่อน: “To assess an LBO candidate, we look for: (1) Strong, stable free cash flows (to service debt), (2) Mature firm/industry, (3) Low existing leverage, (4) Potential for operational efficiency gains, (5) Weak stock price / low valuation (low P/B).”
- วิเคราะห์แต่ละบริษัทเทียบกับเกณฑ์: เดินผ่านทีละข้อโดยใช้ตัวเลขจริงจาก vignette และต้องใช้ keyword ตรง ๆ: “mature,” “stable cash flow,” “low debt-to-equity.”
- สรุป: บอกว่าบริษัทไหนเข้า / ไม่เข้า profile LBO
Exam Tip
ข้อสอบจะให้ตัวเลขการเงินมา (P/B, D/E, net margin, industry type) ใน vignette นายต้องอ้างอิงตัวเลขเหล่านี้ตรง ๆ — ถ้าตอบลอย ๆ ว่า “it has stable cash flows” โดยไม่ชี้ตัวเลข grader ให้แค่คะแนนบางส่วนเท่านั้น
Template 2: “Recommend a Hedge Fund Strategy”
อิงจาก pattern F2023 Q2b
โครงสร้าง:
- ระบุเป้าหมาย/ข้อจำกัดของ investor: ดึงจาก vignette (เช่น “bull market view,” “minimize idiosyncratic risk,” “comfortable with leverage,” “wants international exposure”)
- คัด strategy ออกในใจ: เอา constraint แต่ละข้อมาแมตช์กับลักษณะของแต่ละ strategy แล้วโชว์เหตุผลที่ตัด strategy อื่นทิ้ง
- เลือก & justify: บอกชื่อ strategy แล้ว justify โดยจับคู่ constraint ของ investor → feature ของ strategy ตรง ๆ
Exam Tip
ข้อ “Recommend” ให้คะแนนที่ justification ไม่ใช่แค่ตัว recommendation นาย ต้อง link constraint ของ investor → feature ของ strategy แบบชัด ๆ grader จะเช็ค keyword matching กับ rubric
Template 3: “Explain IV vs. MV and Negotiation Strategy”
อิงจาก pattern S2022 Q2c–d
โครงสร้าง:
- Define: MV = “what the asset would sell for in the open market.” IV = “what the asset is worth to a specific investor” อิงจากข้อได้เปรียบเฉพาะตัว (management skill, tax status, synergies)
- อธิบายความต่าง: IV ต่างกันไปตาม investor; MV เหมือนกันสำหรับทุกคน
- Apply กับ scenario:
- IV >> MV (buyer): Seller should extract excess value — find second-most-motivated buyer, emphasize asset’s uniqueness to buyer’s plans
- IV << MV (buyer): Seller should show comparable sales data, find alternative buyers willing to pay MV
- IV ≈ MV: Market is efficient for this transaction — focus on reducing transaction costs and expediting closing
3. วิเคราะห์ข้อสอบเก่า
Exam 0: Fall 2025, Q2 — Real Estate: REIT Valuation & OCC (6 pts)
ข้อ real estate ล่าสุดเลย เทส IV/MV/NPV, REIT NAV calculation, differential valuation, OCC misconception, และ investment recommendation
| Part | Pts | Topic | Key Answer | Performance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | 1 | Justify purchasing Property X | MV = 200M; NPV = $75M > 0 → buy | As expected |
| (b) | 1 | Calculate REIT Y NAV and differential | NAV = 1.4M = 100K − (50K | Better than expected |
| (c) | 1 | Three reasons for REIT vs. private differential | Future growth in share price; REIT informationally efficient; different CF/OCC expectations | Better than expected |
| (d) | 1 | Evaluate CEO’s momentum statement | Incorrect — ABC is long-term investor, REIT NAV/share prices are mean-reverting → momentum inappropriate | Better than expected |
| (e) | 1 | Evaluate CEO’s OCC statement | Incorrect — REIT-level OCC reflects current assets, not new acquisitions. “The risk resides in the asset, not the investor” → property-level OCC needed | Better than expected |
| (f) | 1 | Recommend REIT Y or Z | REIT Z — lower OCC = lower risk, matches ABC’s risk-averse long-term profile | As expected |
Exam Tip — "The Risk Resides in the Asset, Not the Investor"
นี่คือ quote ตรง ๆ จาก Miller & Geltner เลย ข้อสอบชอบเทสว่าเรามั่ว REIT-level OCC (สะท้อน portfolio risk ปัจจุบัน) กับ property-level/marginal OCC (ที่ใช้กับ new acquisition) หรือเปล่า REIT ทั้งสองเจอ future CFs คล้ายกันบน property ใหม่ → investment value คล้ายกัน Pattern นี้โผล่ตรง ๆ ใน F2025 Q2(e)
Exam Tip — REIT NAV Calculation
NAV = Value of Properties − Liabilities. Differential = NAV − (Share Price × Outstanding Shares) สูตรง่ายแต่หลายคนเลขผิด ระวังตรงที่เขาให้มาเป็น per-share หรือ total value
Exam Tip — Mean Reversion vs. Momentum
REIT prices และ NAVs เป็น mean-reverting ในระยะยาว long-term investor ไม่ควรใช้ momentum strategy เรื่องนี้เชื่อมกับ behavioral-bias-in-investing (herding, recency bias)
Takeaway: F2025 Q2 โครงสร้างดีมาก — แต่ละ part ต่อเนื่องกัน นายต้องรู้ IV/MV/NPV framework, REIT NAV, และที่สำคัญสุดคือความต่างของ OCC (REIT-level vs. property-level)
Exam 1: Spring 2024, Q4 — LBOs (5 pts)
| Part | Topic | Points | Key Answer Elements |
|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | Why LBOs less risky than VC | 1 | Mature firms, proven management, track record of profitability, viable exit strategy (was already public) |
| (b) | Assess 2 LBO candidates | 2 | GHI (EV Maker) — No: immature industry, high D/E (2.0), high P/B, negative margin. LMN (Grocery) — Yes: mature industry, low P/B, stock dropped 50%, low D/E (0.2), positive margin, employee growth → efficiency potential |
| (c) | Calculate min sale price for 30% IRR | 1 | Equity = 500M − 300M = 200M. Min Sale = 200M × (1.30)^5 = 742.59M |
| (d) | LBO risks | 1 | High leverage = no margin for error, CF may not cover debt service, exit strategy may fail |
Exam 2: Spring 2022, Q2 — Real Estate (5 pts)
| Part | Topic | Points | Key Answer Elements |
|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | 4-Quadrant short-term | 1 | Economy improves → demand shifts up → supply fixed → rent increases |
| (b) | 4-Quadrant intermediate-term | 1 | Rent↑ → Price↑ (P=R/i) → P > Construction Cost → new supply↑ → stock↑ → rent partially reverts |
| (c) | Define Investment Value | 1 | ”What the asset is worth to you if you don’t sell it.” Differs across investors due to different CF projections, discount rates, tax status |
| (d) | Negotiating 3 scenarios | 2 | IV>>MV: extract excess value (find competing buyer, emphasize uniqueness). IV<<MV: negotiate up to MV (show comparables, find alternative buyers). IV≈MV: reduce transaction costs, expedite closing |
Exam 3: Fall 2020, Q8 — Hedge Funds & Sharpe (6 pts)
| Part | Topic | Points | Key Answer Elements |
|---|---|---|---|
| (a) | Define Hedged Equity & FoF | 1 | Hedged Equity = L/S stock picking. FoF = invests in 10–30 HFs; pro: diversification; con: double layer of fees |
| (b) | Critique 3 claims (HF vs. MF) | 2 | (1) “HF only for accredited” — Disagree, both require accredited investors. (2) “MF cheaper” — Disagree, compensation is similar. (3) “MF spot, HF derivatives” — Disagree, reversed: MF trade derivatives (futures), HF active in spot |
| (c) | Calculate SR, recommend portfolio | 2 | SR_A=0.2, SR_B=0.3, SR_C=0.3. Choose C over B: same SR but C is positively skewed (desirable) vs. B negatively skewed (cross-ref performance-measurement LO 2k) |
| (d) | 3 ways to game Sharpe Ratio | 1 | (1) Lengthen measurement interval → lower vol. (2) Write OTM options → premium boosts return. (3) Smooth returns (appraisal values) → lower vol. (cross-ref performance-measurement LO 2k) |
Exam Tip — Cross-LO Integration
F2020 Q8 เทสทั้ง LO 1b (Hedge Funds) และ LO 2k (Performance Measurement) ใน คำถามเดียวกัน Pattern นี้โผล่ซ้ำ ๆ — ข้อสอบชอบจับ HF knowledge มาเจอกับ Sharpe Ratio limitations เรียนสอง LO นี้คู่กันเลย
4. จุดพลาดที่เจอบ่อย
Private Equity
| Pitfall | Correction |
|---|---|
| คิด Management Fee จาก Invested Capital | Management Fee ต้องคิดจาก Committed Capital — จำนวนที่ LPs สัญญาไว้ ไม่ใช่ที่ดึงมาแล้ว นี่เป็น exam trap คลาสสิก (F2023 Q1) |
| สับสน VC กับ LBO risk profile | VC = risk สูงมาก (ไอเดียยังไม่ได้พิสูจน์) LBO = risk กลาง ๆ (cash flow พิสูจน์แล้ว) ตัวแยกหลักคือ company maturity |
| ลืม Clawback Provision | ถ้า cumulative fund performance ไม่ถึงเป้าตอน liquidation, LPs สามารถเรียกคืน Carried Interest ที่จ่ายให้ GP ไปแล้ว |
Real Estate
| Pitfall | Correction |
|---|---|
| สับสน IV กับ MV | MV = market price (เหมือนกันทุกคน) IV = ค่าสำหรับ นาย (ต่างกันไปแต่ละ investor) intramarginal investor มี IV > MV |
| สับ Cash Flow vs. Taxable Income items | จำไว้สามตัวหลัก: Depreciation (หักภาษีได้, ไม่ใช่ cash), CapEx (cash outflow, หักภาษีไม่ได้), Principal Repayment (cash outflow, หักภาษีไม่ได้) ส่วน Interest เป็นทั้งสองอย่าง |
| ลืม dynamics ของ intermediate-term ใน 4-Quadrant | Short-term: rent ขึ้นเพราะ stock fixed Intermediate-term: construction ตอบสนอง → stock เพิ่ม → rent ย้อนกลับบางส่วน อย่าหยุดที่คำตอบ short-term |
Hedge Funds
| Pitfall | Correction |
|---|---|
| ลืม ทำไม Moral Hazard ถึงเกิด | Asymmetric incentive fee = call option ให้ manager Gain แชร์, loss ไม่แชร์ Risk-taking incentive แรงสุดเมื่อ far below HWM |
| สับ strategy classification | จำเป็นคู่: Merger Arb = Event-Driven, Convertible Arb = Relative-Value, Market Neutral = Equity Hedge |
| คิดว่า Managed Futures ถูก/retail | MF มี fee structure คล้าย HF และจำกัดเฉพาะ accredited investors เหมือนกัน |
5. Critical Keywords แยกตาม Sub-Topic
| Sub-Topic | Must-Use Keywords |
|---|---|
| Public Equity | Capital Appreciation, Dividend Income, Diversification, Inflation Hedge |
| VC | J-Curve, Committed Capital, Carried Interest, Clawback, Seed/Early/Late Stage, LP/GP |
| LBO | Stable Cash Flow, Mature Firm, Low Debt, Operational Efficiency, Tax Shield, Take Private |
| RE Valuation | Investment Value (IV), Market Value (MV), Intramarginal Investor, Four-Quadrant Model |
| RE Tax | EATCF, Depreciation Tax Shield, APV = NPV(Property) + NPV(Financing) |
| RE OCC | REIT-level OCC (portfolio risk), Property-level OCC (marginal/new acquisition), “Risk resides in asset not investor”, Mean Reversion |
| RE REIT | NAV = Properties − Liabilities, NAV Differential, Informationally Efficient, Future Growth Expectations |
| HF Structure | High-Water Mark, “2 and 20”, Lockup, Gate, Moral Hazard, Asymmetric Fee |
| HF Strategies | Macro, Event-Driven (Merger Arb, Distressed, Activist), Relative-Value (Convertible Arb), Equity Hedge (L/S, Market-Neutral, Short-Selling) |
Past Exam Database แบบครบ: LO 1b (Fall 2020 – Fall 2024)
F2020 Q8 — Hedge Funds & Sharpe Ratio
(ครอบคลุมแล้วใน §3 ข้างบน — ดู Exam 3: Fall 2020, Q8)
ของแถมเพิ่มจาก illustrative solutions:
- Managed futures (MF) critique: MF also only for accredited investors; fee structures similar to HF; MF trade exclusively in derivatives (not spot); MF are more regulated in some jurisdictions
- Sharpe gaming: (1) Lengthen measurement interval → lower std dev. (2) Compound monthly returns but calculate std dev from non-compounded returns. (3) Write OTM puts/calls → collect premium, no loss for years. (4) Smooth returns via infrequent marking-to-market. (5) Enter total-return swap to pay best/worst returns → remove tails
S2021 Q4 — Private Equity: Suitability, Fee Structure, Net Return
LO: 1b | Source: Anson/Fabozzi Ch 18, Ch 19
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | PE suitability for pension plan | ✅ Suitable: 5% allocation = tolerable risk. Long time horizon (open plan, young members = can tolerate illiquidity and long lock-up). Note: PE and public equity have moderately high correlation — only moderate diversifier. |
| (b) | PE fee structure | Management fee: 2% on committed capital. Carried interest: 20% of profits above hurdle rate. Preferred return (C%): GP earns carry only if return > C%. Clawback: LPs recover over-paid carry at fund liquidation if targets not met. |
| (c) | Net return calculation | Year 1: 12.7% − 2% − 20%×(12.7%−6%) = 9.36%. Year 2: 4.5% − 2% = 2.5% (below hurdle, no carry). Year 3: 7.8% − 2% − 20%×(7.8%−6%) = 5.44%. Geometric avg = [(1.0936)(1.025)(1.0544)]^(1/3) − 1 = 5.73%. |
| (d) | Direct vs. indirect PE | Direct: invest in preferred convertible stock of private company; senior to common; converts on exit event. Indirect: invest via VC/buyout fund (LP structure); 7–10yr life; manager selects and manages portfolio. |
| (e) | Recommend PE route | Indirect (fund). Pension plan lacks expertise to identify/manage direct investments. Indirect: benefits from manager selection skill, active management, diversification. |
| (f) | Critique dividend recapitalization by CEO | Incorrect approach. Dividend recapitalization = issuing debt to pay special dividend → overleverages the company. Weakens long-term company health for short-term return boost. Inconsistent with pension plan’s long-term investment horizon. |
Exam Tip — Management Fee on Committed vs. Invested Capital
ใช้ committed capital เสมอ เป็นฐานคำนวณ management fee Exam trap (F2023 Q1 ยืนยันแล้ว): หลายคนใช้ invested capital ซึ่งผิด Committed = จำนวนที่ LPs สัญญาให้ fund ไม่ใช่ที่ดึงมาแล้ว
F2021 Q4 — Venture Capital: Strategy, Valuation, Moral Hazard, Waterfall
LO: 1b | Source: Anson/Fabozzi Ch 18
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | VC definition | Equity co-invested with entrepreneurs in young, fast-growing companies. Active in tech, telecoms, life sciences, clean tech. Two sub-stages: early stage (seed/startup) and expansion stage. |
| (b) | Why VC hard to value/manage | Companies in cash-burning stage — often years from profitability. Traditional portfolio techniques (DCF, comps) require stable cash flows. No market prices. Unpredictable exit timing. |
| (c) | Moral hazard vs. adverse selection | See lo-1-curated-questions §LO 1b Essential #3 for the table. Moral hazard (post-contract): GP takes excessive risk to max carry; or doesn’t invest to collect management fee. Adverse selection (pre-contract): LP seeking lowest-cost GP attracts unskilled GPs. |
| (d) | Distribution waterfall (300M, 15% hurdle, 100% catch-up, 75/25) | Return capital to LP: 200M = 30M×25%/75% = 60M at 75/25: LP gets 15M. LP total: 25M. |
| (e) | Best PE route (avoid cash-burning, life science focus, reduce info asymmetry) | Co-investment. Avoids cash-burning by cherry-picking profitable companies only. Allows sector targeting. Reduces information asymmetry through direct deal participation and GP monitoring. |
S2022 Q2 — Real Estate: Four-Quadrant Model & IV/MV
LO: 1b | Source: Geltner Ch 12
(ครอบคลุมแล้วใน §3 ข้างบน — Exam 2: Spring 2022, Q2)
ของแถมเพิ่ม:
- IV formula: discount cash flows ที่ opportunity cost of capital ถ้า OCC ต่ำ (เช่น tax-exempt pension) → IV สูงขึ้น
- Short-term rent dynamics: supply fixed (สร้างใหม่ในชั่วข้ามคืนไม่ได้) → exogenous demand shock → rent ขึ้น
- Intermediate-term: P = R/i → rent ขึ้น → price ขึ้น → price > construction cost → เริ่มสร้าง → stock เพิ่ม → rent ย้อนกลับบางส่วน
- Scenario 3 (IV ≈ MV): focus ที่การลด transaction costs (realtor fees, closing costs) และเร่งปิดดีล
F2022 Q11 — Venture Capital Characteristics
LO: 1b | Source: Anson/Fabozzi Ch 18
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | 2 concerns about young VC funds focused on rapid IPOs | (1) Capital inflows → overvaluation → IPO not based on real economic value. (2) Rapid IPO prevents proper company development → undervaluation → lower equity value long-term. |
| (b) | J-Curve effect | Years 1–5: losses (management fees + early failures) → negative returns. Then: successful companies generate positive cash flows → NAV recovers. Final stage: IPOs/exits → large gains. Residual value distributed at wind-up. Risk: many start-ups never reach IPO stage. |
| (c) | Justify GP fees | GP contributions: (1) Recognize business opportunities; (2) Bring management expertise; (3) Assess exit timing; (4) Maintain network (banks, acquirers, second-round VCs) to facilitate IPO or acquisition. |
| (d) | VC characteristics across 4 perspectives | Return: expected to beat S&P500 long-term; compensates for failure risk. Time horizon: 10+ years; initial losses in years 1–5 require patient capital. Liquidity: no public market; committed capital called over years 1–5. Diversification: low correlation to traditional assets (good diversifier); regional concentration risk exists. |
| (d)(ii) | VC suitability for pension plan | Return: acceptable if plan can handle capital calls during negative-return period. Time horizon: ✅ young workforce, long liabilities. Liquidity: ✅ low immediate payout needs, but manage capital call timing. Diversification: ✅ low correlation provides genuine diversification. |
| (e) | LP vs. LLC for pension plan | Limited Partnership (LP) recommended: (1) Pension plan has small allocation → hard to justify internal expertise; (2) LP requires less operational involvement than LLC; (3) LP suits passive investor without governance obligations. |
S2023 Q12 — LBO: Definition, Return, Methods, VC vs. LBO
LO: 1b | Source: Anson/Fabozzi Ch 19
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | LBO definition | Taking a company with publicly traded stock private, or putting a company in the hands of current management, using predominantly debt financing. |
| (b) | LBO compounded return | Value of long-term CF = EBITDA/(Discount Rate − Growth Rate) = 2,500M. Return = (100M equity)^(1/9) − 1 = 43.0%. |
| (c) | 4 value realization methods | (1) Sell to strategic buyer/competitor; (2) IPO; (3) Another LBO; (4) Straight refinancing. |
| (d) | Recommend LBO candidate (Company B vs. C) | Company B. Better profitability margins (13% vs 9% operating, 7% vs 4% net). Stronger free cash flows (0.5M). Lower leverage (D/E = 51% vs 76%). More liquid assets (61% vs 45% current assets). Weak stock price (declined 17%). |
| (e) | 4 benefits of LBOs | Management: (1) Interest tax deductibility; (2) Less scrutiny from public investors; (3) Freedom from corporate parent; (4) Management becomes significant equity holders. Investors: (5) Bid price typically at premium to market. |
| (f) | VC vs. LBO comparison | Equity stake: VC = significant minority; LBO = 100% (absolute control). Risk/IRR: VC targets higher IRR (unproven tech); LBO targets lower IRR (stable, mature). Strategy: VC funds new tech; LBO targets operational efficiency. |
F2023 Q1 — Venture Capital: Active Investing, Compensation, Moral Hazard
LO: 1b | Source: Anson/Fabozzi Ch 18
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | Why VCs are not passive | Active roles: Board/advisory seat; monitor progress and implement incentive plans; provide management insight; hire/fire key managers including founding entrepreneur; provide access to lawyers, bankers, acquirers. |
| (b) | VC compensation calculation | Management fee = 2% × committed capital (1M. Incentive fee = 20% × 1.2M. Total = $2.2M. |
| (c)(i) | Which option VC chooses | Option 2 (riskier: 50% gain/80% loss). Incentive fee acts as a free call option — VC doesn’t bear downside losses. Option 2 expected incentive fee = 1M > Option 1 = 0.45M. |
| (c)(ii) | Is VC choice optimal for ABC? | No. Option 2 expected return = 50M×(−20%)×80% = −2M. VC chooses Option 2 (higher fee) even though it has lower expected return for ABC. |
| (d) | Covenants to protect ABC | (1) Clawback: recover previously paid incentive fees at fund liquidation if LPs not profitable. (2) Escrow agreement: portion of incentive fees held until fund liquidation. (3) No profit-sharing until all committed capital returned: LP capital must be repaid before GP gets any carry. |
Exam Tip — Incentive Fee as a Call Option
นี่คือแก่นของ PE/VC moral hazard เลย Incentive fee = call option บน profits (ฟรีสำหรับ VC — ไม่จ่าย premium) VC ถูก incentivize ให้ take risk เกินจำเป็นเพราะ: gain แชร์ (ผ่าน carry), loss ไม่แชร์ (VC ไม่คืน management fee ในปีที่ขาดทุน) เลยต้องมี clawback กับ escrow covenant
F2023 Q2 — Hedge Fund Beta & Strategy Recommendation
LO: 1b | Source: CFA Alternative Investments Primer Ch 3-4
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | Beta calculation | Set up CAPM for two years with same total portfolio return. 20XX: r_A = 3.2% + [3/8×1 + 5/8×β_HF]×(8%−3.2%). 20YY: r_B = 4% + [8/20×1 + 12/20×β_HF]×(10%−4%). rA=rB → solve: β_HF = −2.33 (short-selling fund has strongly negative beta). |
| (b) | HF strategy per investor | Investor A (bull market, no idiosyncratic/event risk, leverage OK, international, low fees): Global Macro. Investor B (neutral market, directional sector/stock view, domestic): Equity Long/Short or Market Neutral. Investor C (bear market, minimize credit risk, alpha not beta, manager skill, no regression): Market Neutral (convergence trading strategies, not statistical arbitrage). |
F2023 Q3 — Super Asset Classes, VC Risk Premiums, PE Legal Structures
LO: 1b, 2k | Source: Anson/Fabozzi Ch 18, CFA PM Practice Ch 19
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | Super asset classes | Capital assets: claim on future CFs (stocks, bonds). Economic inputs: consumed in production (grains, metals, energy). Store of value: finished product not linked to future CFs (art, gold non-industrial). |
| (b) | VC risk premiums vs. public market | (1) Business risk before company can implement plan (higher than public companies). (2) Illiquidity premium (no secondary market for VC interests). |
| (c) | Common PE legal structures | LP (limited partnership), LLC (limited liability company), SPV (special purpose vehicle). PE investments are illiquid → cannot reliably fund benefit payments for defined benefit pension plans. |
| (d) | Portfolio A vs. B recommendation | Portfolio A expected return = 20%×3.5% + 80%×5.0% = 4.7% ✅ (≥4.5%). Portfolio B = 5.1% ✅. Both meet return objective. BUT: distressed debt investors convert debt to equity → Portfolio B has equity risk exposure → violates second objective (minimize equity risk). Recommend Portfolio A despite lower Sharpe ratio (0.7 vs 0.9). |
Exam Tip — Distressed Debt Has Equity Risk
Distressed debt investor ซื้อ debt ราคาถูกโดยตั้งใจจะแปลงเป็น equity, turn around บริษัท, แล้วทำกำไรจาก stock appreciation แปลว่า distressed debt มี equity risk ไม่ใช่แค่ credit risk Portfolio ไหนต้องลด equity risk ก็ต้องตัด distressed debt ออก
F2023 Q4 — Real Estate: After-Tax IRR (Excel)
LO: 1b | Source: Geltner Ch 14
ข้อนี้เป็น calculation ล้วน (Excel) Concept หลัก:
- After-tax NOI = Pre-tax NOI − [(NOI − Interest − Depreciation) × tax rate] (ภาษีจาก operating income)
- Depreciation = (Property value − Land value) / 50 years = straight-line
- Recapture tax = 35% บนยอดรวม depreciation ที่เคลมไว้ทั้งหมดตอนขาย
- Capital gains tax = 25% บน (sale price − purchase price)
- EATCF = NOI − debt service (interest + principal) − tax payments
- After-tax IRR: ใช้ equity cash flows (NOI − debt service − taxes) + equity reversion ตอนขาย
สอง scenario: (a) เคลม depreciation → ภาษีรายปีต่ำลง แต่เจอ recapture tax ตอนขาย; (b) ไม่เคลม depreciation → ภาษีรายปีสูงกว่า แต่ไม่มี recapture เปรียบเทียบ IRR เพื่อตัดสินว่า scenario ไหนดีกว่าสำหรับ marginal investor
Pension fund max bid: หา price ที่ทำให้ pension fund ได้ IRR เท่ากับ marginal investor ใน scenario ที่ดีกว่า (pension fund tax-exempt → IV สูงกว่า)
S2024 Q3 — Hedge Fund Risks & Stub Trading
LO: 1b | Source: CFA Alternative Investments Primer Ch 3-4
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | HF risk taxonomy | Complexity risk: complex structures/embedded options. Illiquidity risk: small-cap, unlisted, regulated assets. Event risk: returns contingent on specific event. Process risk: IDIOSYNCRATIC (not fundamental) risk from opacity of investment process. Beta expansion: CROWDED SHORTS (not longs) — forced buying when HFs short same securities. Off-balance sheet risk: leverage, derivatives, short volatility, counterparty risk not visible on balance. |
| (b) | Stub trading strategy | A fair value = 40 (stake in B) = 50 → A is undervalued. → Long A, Short B. Hedge ratio: B contributes 25% to A → buy 3 shares of A and short 1 share of B. |
S2024 Q4 — LBO: Risk Comparison, Candidate Assessment, Return Target
LO: 1b | Source: Anson/Fabozzi Ch 19
(ครอบคลุมแล้วใน §3 ข้างบน — Exam 1: Spring 2024, Q4)
ของแถมเพิ่ม:
- LBO เสี่ยงน้อยกว่า VC: mature companies, proven management, track record of profitability, more viable IPO exit, undervalued assets, operational efficiency focus (ไม่ใช่ innovation)
- LBO risk ที่ทำให้ return เสีย: high leverage ทำให้ไม่มี margin for error; CF ไม่พอจ่าย debt service; management strategy อาจล้มเหลว; incentive/monitoring scheme ไม่พอ; exit strategy timing/price risk
F2024 Q13 — Real Estate: REIT NAV, Direct Investment Critique
LO: 1b | Source: Geltner Ch 12
| Part | Topic | Key Answer Points |
|---|---|---|
| (a) | 2 RE market differences from securities markets | (1) Well-functioning market exists for underlying physical assets (commercial buildings). (2) RE asset market is NOT informationally efficient. (3) Two levels of markets: private RE asset market AND publicly traded REIT shares. |
| (b) | Evaluate Analyst A (direct investment, market timing) | Disagree. RE markets are not fully predictable (prices adjust slowly but not perfectly). Transaction costs in direct property market are much higher than securities → profit from timing is often absorbed. Long holding periods mitigate per-annum return from timing. Returns over long periods depend more on property management than timing. |
| (c) | REIT NAV vs. share price | NAV = based on current property values (private market valuation, remove debt liabilities). Share price = reflects future growth expectations (public market clearing price). NAV: less informationally efficient. Share price: more informationally efficient. |
| (d) | Can REIT C pay more than REIT D for a property? | Not directly derivable from cost of capital or P/E. Company-level OCC ≠ property-level OCC (“risk resides in the asset, not the investor”). However, REIT C may have higher IV due to tax benefits, portfolio synergies, or management advantages. |
Updated Cross-References
- keynote-gem-lo-1b — source keynote
- lo-1-curated-questions — full Q&A source with answer key essentials
- private-equity — PE fund structures, waterfall, J-curve
- hedge-funds — HF strategy taxonomy, beta, risk types
- real-estate-investment — IV/MV, 4-quadrant, REIT, after-tax IRR
- performance-measurement — Sharpe ratio gaming (cross-LO 1b/2k questions)
- HF Interactive Lab — F2020 Q8 · F2023 Q2 · S2024 Q3 verbatim drills, β_HF = −2.33 solver, HWM €80→100→86.4→116 worked example