FRM Part II · FRM Exam Part II · Risk Management for Changing Interest Rates: Asset-Liability Management and Duration Techniques
A bank has assets of $500 million and a leverage-adjusted duration gap of 2.0 years. Current yields are 5% (annual compounding). Using the approximation ΔE ≈ −DGap × A × Δy/(1+y), what is the estimated change in economic value of equity if yields fall by 50 basis points?
Equity rises by about $4.76 million. With a positive duration gap of 2.0 years on $500 million of assets, a 0.5% yield fall gives 2.0 × 500 × 0.005 = 5.0, which is then divided by 1.05 to adjust for compounding.
- A-$4.76 million
- B+$5.00 million
- C+$4.76 millionCorrect
- D+$4.55 million
Explanation
ΔE = −2.0 × 500 × (−0.005)/1.05 = +5.0/1.05 = +$4.76 million. The +$5.00 million answer omits division by (1+y). The negative sign option ignores that falling rates benefit a positive-gap bank.
Did you get it right without looking?
One question tells you little. A timed set on Risk Management for Changing Interest Rates: Asset-Liability Management and Duration Techniques shows your real accuracy, how long you take and where you lose marks.
More Risk Management for Changing Interest Rates: Asset-Liability Management and Duration Techniques questions
- Using the data of a bank with assets of USD 1,000 million, duration gap of 1.70 years, and equity of USD 80 million, the yield level of 5% (…
- A bank reports assets of $500 million with duration 5.0 years, and liabilities of $450 million with duration 2.0 years. What is the leverage…
- A portfolio manager holds a bond with a modified duration of 7.0 and a convexity of 60. If yields rise by 50 basis points, what is the appro…
- A bank has total assets of $1,000 million with a modified duration of 4.0 years and total liabilities of $900 million with a modified durati…
- A bank has rate-sensitive assets of USD 600 million and rate-sensitive liabilities of USD 450 million over a one-year horizon. If all rates …
- A risk manager notes that a bank's duration gap is zero. Which limitation of using duration gap alone to measure EVE risk remains valid?