FRM Part II · FRM Exam Part II · Future Value and Exposure
A bank has a 4-year FX forward and a 4-year interest rate swap, both with the same counterparty and no netting. Exposure is measured as the 95% PFE at each date, assuming normally distributed mark-to-market values with zero mean. The FX forward's mark-to-market standard deviation grows as 8 million × sqrt(t) (t in years). What is the FX forward's 95% PFE at 4 years (using 1.645 as the z-value)?
The 95% PFE is 26.32 million. The mark-to-market standard deviation at four years is 8 times the square root of 4, or 16 million, and multiplying by the 1.645 normal quantile gives 26.32 million, reflecting exposure growing with the square root of time.
- A26.32 millionCorrect
- B13.16 million
- C6.58 million
- D52.64 million
Explanation
Standard deviation at t=4 is 8 × sqrt(4) = 16 million. PFE = 1.645 × 16 = 26.32 million. Using 8 million (t=1) gives 13.16; using sqrt(4) as 2 only on z gives 6.58 mistakes; doubling again gives 52.64.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Future Value and Exposure shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Future Value and Exposure questions
- A bank has a single netted portfolio with a counterparty. At a future date the portfolio value V is normally distributed with mean zero and …
- A risk manager compares the exposure profiles of two uncollateralised trades with the same counterparty and same maturity: a 5-year interest…
- A dealer receives initial margin from a counterparty, segregated with a third-party custodian, in addition to daily variation margin. Compar…
- A bank has two trades with a counterparty under a netting agreement. Trade 1 has an exposure at a future date that is normally distributed w…
- A bank holds a 5-year interest rate swap in which it receives fixed and pays floating, with payments exchanged periodically. Which descripti…
- A bank has a single uncollateralised interest rate swap with a corporate client. Which statement best describes why the expected exposure pr…