46c0465310792z - 8-4 Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–9. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 2
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 4
Background image of page 5

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 6
Background image of page 7

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Background image of page 8
Background image of page 9
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: 8-4 Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return Answers to End-of—Chapter Questions No, it is not riskless. The portfolio would be free of default risk and liquidity risk, but inflation could erode the portfolio's purchasing power. If the actual inflation rate is greater than that expected, interest rates in general will rise to incorporate a larger inflation premium (IP) and— as we saw in Chapter 7—the value of the portfolio would decline. No, you would be subject to reinvestment rate risk. You might expect to “roll over” the Treasury bills at a constant (or even increasing) rate of interest, but if interest rates fall, your investment income will decrease. A U.S. government-backed bond that provided interest with constant purchasing power (that is, an indexed bond) would be close to riskless. The U.S. Treasury currently issues indexed bonds. . The probability distribution for complete certainty is a vertical line. . The probability distribution for total uncertainty is the X—axis from -oo to +00. The expected return on a life insurance policy is calculated just as for a common stock. Each outcome is multiplied by its probability of occurrence, and then these products are summed. For example, suppose a 1-year term policy pays $10,000 at death, and the probability of the policyholders death in that year is 2%. Then, there is a 98% probability of zero return and a 2% probability of $10,000: Expected return = 0.98($0) + 0.02($10,000) = $200. This expected return could be compared to the premium paid. Generally, the premium will be larger because of sales and administrative costs, and insurance company profits, indicating a negative expected rate of return on the investment in the policy. . There is a perfect negative correlation between the returns on the life insurance policy and the returns on the policyholder’s human capital. In fact, these events (death and future lifetime earnings capacity) are mutually exclusive. The prices of goods and services must cover their costs. Costs include labor, materials, and capital. Capital costs to a borrower include a return to the saver who supplied the capital, plus a mark—up (called a “spread") for the financial intermediary that brings the saver and the borrower together. The more efficient the financial system, the lower the costs of intermediation, the lower the costs to the borrower, and, hence, the lower the prices of goods and services to consumers. People are generally risk averse. Therefore, they are willing to pay a premium to decrease the uncertainty of their future cash flows. A life insurance policy guarantees an income (the face value of the policy) to the policyholder’s beneficiaries when the policyholder’s future earnings capacity drops to zero. Yes, if the portfolio’s beta is equal to zero. In practice, however, it may be impossible to find individual stocks that have a nonpositive beta. In this case it would also be impossible to have a stock portfolio with a zero beta. Even if such a portfolio could be constructed, investors would probably be better off just purchasing Treasury bills, or other zero beta investments. Integrated Case 1 8-7 8-8 2 Security A is less risky if held in a diversified portfolio because of its negative correlation with other stocks. In a single—asset portfolio, Security A would be more risky because CA > as and CVA > CVB. No. For a stock to have a negative beta, its returns would have to logically be expected to go up in the future when other stocks' returns were falling. Just because in one year the stock’s return increases when the market declined doesn’t mean the stock has a negative beta. A stock in a given year may move counter to the overall market, even though the stock’s beta is positive. The risk premium on a high-beta stock would increase more than that on a low-beta stock. RP,- = Risk Premium for Stockj = (rM — rRF)bj. If risk aversion increases, the slope of the SML will increase, and so will the market risk premium (rM — rRF). The product (rM — rRF)bj is the risk premium of the jth stock. If b,- is low (say, 0.5), then the product will be small; RP, will increase by only half the increase in RPM. However, if b, is large (say, 2.0), then its risk premium will rise by twice the increase in RPM. According to the Security Market Line (SML) equation, an increase in beta will increase a company’s expected return by an amount equal to the market risk premium times the change in beta. For example, assume that the risk-free rate is 6%, and the market risk premium is 5%. If the company’s beta doubles from 0.8 to 1.6 its expected return increases from 10% to 14%. Therefore, in general, a company’s expected return will not double when its beta doubles. a. A decrease in risk aversion will decrease the return an investor will require on stocks. Thus, prices on stocks will increase because the cost of equity will decline. b. With a decline in risk aversion, the risk premium will decline as compared to the historical difference between returns on stocks and bonds. c. The implication of using the SML equation with historical risk premiums (which would be higher than the “current” risk premium) is that the CAPM estimated required return would actually be higher than what would be reflected if the more current risk premium were used. Integrated Case Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return Solutions to End-of—Chapter Problems 3-1 F (0.1)(-50%) + (o.2)(-5%) + (0.4)(160/0) + (o.2)(25%) + (0.1)(60%) 11.40%. II II 62 = (—50% — 11.40%)2(0.1) + (-5% — 11.40%)2(0.2) + (16% — 11.40%)2(0.4) + (25% — 11.40%)2(0.2) + (60% — 11.40%)2(0.1) 02 = 712.44; a = 26.69%. 0 CV _ 26.69 /0 — = 2.34. 11.40% 8-2 Investment Beta $35,000 0.8 40 000 1.4 Total M bp 2 ($35,000/$75,000)(0.8) + ($40,000/$75,000)(1.4) = 1.12. 8-3 r... = 6%; rM = 13%; b = 0-7; r = ? r = rRF + “M _ rRF)b = 6% + (13% — 6%)0.7 = 10.9%. 8-4 rRF = RPM 2 60/0; rM = rM : 5% +‘(6%)1 = 11%. rwhen b = 1.2 = ? r = 5% + 6%(l.2) = 12.2%. 3‘5 a- r = 11%; rap = 7%; RPM = 4%. r = rRF + (M — rRF)b 11% = 70/0 + 40/ob 4% = 4%b b = 1. Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return Integrated Case 3 b. rRF = 7%; RPM 2 6%; b = 1. r = rm: + (rM — rRF)b = 7% + (6%)1 = 13%. 8-6 a. F: if;i . i=1 R, = 0.1(-35%) + 0.2(00/0) + 0.4(200/0) + 0.2(250/0) + 0.1(450/0) = 14% versus 12% for X. b. 0: [fin—WE. of, = (-10% — 12%)2(0.1) + (2% — 12%)2(0.2) + (12% — 12%)2(0.4) + (20% — 12%)2(o.2) + (38% — 12%)2(0.1) = 148.8%. ox = 12.20% versus 20.35% for Y. CVx = csx/Fx = 12.20%/12% = 1.02, while CVY = 20.35%/14% = 1.45. If Stock Y is less highly correlated with the market than X, then it might have a lower beta than Stock X, and hence be less risky in a portfolio sense. $400,000 $600,000 $1,000,000 $2,000,000 — 1.50 +——— -0.50 +—-— 1.25 +——— $4,000,000 ( ) $4,000,000 ( ) $4,000,000 ( ) $4,000,000 bp = (0.1)(15) + (0.15)(-0.50) + (0.25)(1.25) + (0.5)(0.75) = 0.15 — 0.075 + 0.3125 + 0.375 = 0.7625. 8-7 Porh‘olio beta = (0.75) rp = FR; + (FM - I'RFXbp) = 6% + (14% — 6%)(0.7625) = 12.1%. Alternative solution: First, calculate the return for each stock using the CAPM equation [rRF + (rM — rRF)b], and then calculate the weighted average of these returns. rRF = 6% and (m — rRF) = 8%. m Investment fl rirfiflfligfib Weight A v $ 400,000 1.50 18% 0.10 B 600,000 (0.50) 2 0.15 C 1,000,000 1.25 16 0.25 D 2,000,000 0.75 12 M Total ME Q9 rp = 18%(0.10) + 2%(015) + 16%(0.25) + 12%(050) = 12.1%. 4 Integrated Case Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return 8—8 In equilibrium: r, = F, = 12.5%. r] = rRF + (M — rRF)b 12.5% = 4.5% + (10.5% — 4.5%)b b = 1.33. 8-9 We know that bR = 1.50, b5 = 0.75, rM = 13%, rRF = 7%. r, : FRI: + (rM — rRF)b, : 70/0 + (130/0 — 70/0)bj. rR = 7% + 6%(1.50) = 16.0% rS = 7% + 6%(0.75) = 11.5 4.5% 8-10 An index fund will have a beta of 1.0. If rM is 12.0% (given in the problem) and the risk-free rate is 5%, you can calculate the market risk premium (RPM) calculated as rM — rRF as follows: r = rm: ‘1' 12.0% = 5% + (RPM)1.0 7.00/0 = RPM. Now, you can use the RPM, the rm, and the two stocks’ betas to calculate their required returns. Bradford: r3 = I'm: + = 5% + (7.0%)145 = 50/0 + 10.150/0 = 15.19%. Farley: FF = I'm: + = 5% + (7.0%)085 = 5% + 5.95% =, 10.95%. The difference in their required returns is: 15.15% — 10.95% = 4.2%. 8-11 rm: = r* + IP = 2.5% + 3.5% = 6%. r5 = 6% + (6.5%)1.7 = 17.05%. Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return Integrated Case 5 8-12 Using Stock X (or any stock): 90/0 = FR}: + (rM — rRF)bx 9% = 5.5% + (rM — rRF)0.8 (rM — rRF) = 4.3750/0. 8'13 3- l'j = rRF + (I‘M " TRF)bi = 90/0 + (140/0 — = 15.50/0. b. 1. rRF increases to 10%: rM increases by 1 percentage point, from 14% to 15%. ri = rRF + (rM — rRF)b. = 10% + (15% — 10%)13 = 16.5%. 2. rRF decreases to 8%: no decreases by 1%, from 14% to 13%. r~I = rRF + (rM — rRF)bi = 8% +-(13% — 8%)1.3 = 14.5%. c. 1. no increases to 16%: ri = FR}: + (FM —‘ rRF)bi = 90/0 + (160/0 — 90/0)1.3 = 18.10/0. 2. rM decreases to 13%: r; = I‘RF + (I’M — I‘RF)bi = 9% + (13% — 9%)13 = 14.2%. . _ $142,500 $7,500 8 14 Old portfolio beta $150,000 (b) + $150,000 (1.00) 1.12 : 0.95b + 0.05 1.07 = 0.9513 1.1263 = b. New portfolio beta = 0.95(1.1263) + 0.05(1.75) = 1.1575 2 1.16. Alternative solutions: 1. Old portfolio beta = 1.12 = (0.05)b1 + (0.05M;2 + + (0.05)b20 1.12 = (Zbi)(0.05) 2b. = 1.12/0.05 = 22.4. New portfolio beta = (22.4 — 1.0 + 1.75)(0.05) = 1.1575 2 1.16. 2. Zbi excluding the stock with the beta equal to 1.0 is 22.4 — 1.0 = 21.4, so the beta of the portfolio excluding this stock is b = 21.4/ 19 = 1.1263. The beta of the new portfolio is: 1.1263(0.95) + 1.75(0.05) = 1.1575 5 1.16. 6 Integrated Case Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return 8-15 bHRI = 1.8; bLRJ = 0.6. No changes occur. rRF = 6%. Decreases by 1.5% to 4.5%. rM = 13%. Falls to 10.5%. Now SML: r, = rRF + (rM — rRF)b,. rHRI = 4.5% + (10.5% — 4.5%)1.8 = 4.5% + 6%(1.8) = 15.3% rm, 2 4.5% + (10.5% — 4.5%)06 = 4.5% + 6%(0.6) = 8.1% Difference 7 0/ 8-16 Step 1: Determine the market risk premium from the CAPM: 0.12 = '1‘ (FM — rRF)1.25 (FM — TRF) = Step 2: Calculate the beta of the new portfolio: ($500,000/$5,500,000)(0.75) + ($5,000,000/$5,500,000)(1.25) = 1.2045. Step 3: Calculate the required return on the new portfolio: 5.25% + (5.4°/o)(1.2045) = 11.75%. 8-17 After additional investments are made, for the entire fund to have an expected return of 13%, the portfolio must have a beta of 1.5455 as shown below: 13% = 4.5% + (5.5%)b b = 1.5455. Since the fund's beta is a weighted average of the betas of all the individual investments, we can calculate the required beta on the additional investment as follows: ($20,000,000)(1.5) + $5,000,000X $25,000,000 $25,000,000 1.5455 = 1.2 + 0.2x 0.3455 = 0.2x X = 1.7275. 1.5455: 8-18 3. ($1 million)(0.5) + ($0)(0.5) = $0.5 million. b. You would probably take the sure $0.5 million. c. Risk averter. d. 1. ($1.15 million)(0.5) + ($0)(0.5) = $575,000, or an expected profit of $75,000. 2. $75,000/$500,000 = 15%. 3. This depends on the individual's degree of risk aversion. Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return Integrated Case 7 8-19 8 4. Again, this depends on the individual. 5. The situation would be unchanged if the stocks’ returns were perfectly positively correlated. Otherwise, the stock portfolio would have the same expected return as the single stock (15%) but a lower standard deviation. If the correlation coefficient between each pair of stocks was a negative one, the portfolio would be virtually riskless. Since p for stocks is generally in the range of +0.35, investing in a portfolio of stocks would definitely be an improvement over investing in the single stock. Fx = 10%; bx = 0.9; ox = 35%. IA”, = 12.5%; by = 1.2; Uy = 25%. rRF = 6%; RPM = 5%. b. Integrated Case CVX = 35%/10% = 3.5. CVY = 25%/12.5% = 2.0. For diversified investors the relevant risk is measured by beta. Therefore, the stock with the higher beta is more risky. Stock Y has the higher beta so it is more risky than Stock X. rx = 6% + 5%(09) = 10.5%. rY = 6% + 5%(1.2) = 12%. l’x = 10.5%; PX = 10%. FY = 12%; FY = 12.5%. Stock Y would be most attractive to a diversified investor since its expected return of 12.5% is greater than its required return of 12%. b, = ($7,500/$10,000)0.9 + ($2,500/$10,000)1.2 = 0.6750 + 0.30 = 0.9750. rp = 6% + 5%(0975) = 10.875%. If RPM increases from 5% to 6%, the stock with the highest beta will have the largest increase in its required return. Therefore, Stock Y will have the greatest increase. Check: rx = 6% + 6%(O.9) = 11.4%. Increase 10.5% to 11.4%. ry = 6% + 6%(1.2) = 13.2%. Increase 12% to 13.2%. Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return 8—20 The answers to a, b, c, and d are given below: re r_B Portfolio 2001 (18.00%) (14.50%) (16.25%) 2002 33.00 21.80 27.40 2003 15.00 30.50 22.75 2004 (0.50) (7.60) (4.05) 2005 27.00 26.30 26.65 Mean 11.30 11.30 11.30 Std. Dev. 20.79 20.78 20.13 Coef. Var. 1.84 1.84 1.78 e. A risk-averse investor would choose the portfolio over either Stock A or Stock B alone, since the portfolio offers the same expected return but with less risk. This result occurs because returns on A and B are not perfectly positively correlated (rAB = 0.88). 3-21 a. f... = 0.10%) + 0.2(90/6) + 0.4(110/6) + 0.203%) + 0.1(150/6) = 11%. rRF = 6%. (given) Therefore, the SML equation is: n = rm: + (I‘M - rRF)bi = 60/0 + (11% - 6°/o)bi = 6% + (5°/o)bi. b. First, determine the fund’s beta, bF. The weights are the percentage of funds invested in each stock: A = $160/$500 = 0.32. B = $120/$500 = 0.24. C = $80/$500 = 0.16. ' D = $80/$500 = 0.16. E = $60/$500 = 0.12. bF = 0.32(o.5) + 0.24(2.0) + 0.16(4.0) + 0.16(1.0) + o.12(3.0) = 0.16 + 0.48 + 0.64 + 0.16 + 0.36 = 1.8. Next, use bF = 1.8 in the SML determined in Part a: FF = 6% + (11% — 6%)1.8 = 6% + 9% = 15%. c. rN = Required rate of return on new stock = 6% + (5%)2.0 = 16%. An expected return of 15% on the new stock is below the 16% required rate of return on an investment with a risk of b = 2.0. Since rN = 16% > PM = 15%, the new stock should n_ot be purchased. The expected rate of return that would make the fund indifferent to purchasing the stock is 16%. Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return Integrated Case 9 ...
View Full Document

This note was uploaded on 07/18/2008 for the course FIN 300 taught by Professor Thomas during the Spring '08 term at Long Beach City College.

Page1 / 9

46c0465310792z - 8-4 Chapter 8: Risk and Rates of Return...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 9. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online