
Explanation:
Option A: Correct This option provides specific calculations for a consol (perpetual) bond, and we can verify the math.
$100 \text{ (Face Value)} \times 3.0% = `.$5.0%0.05`$). / 0.05 = \.$1 / \text{Yield}$.$1 / 0.05 = 20 \text{ years}60`) and modified duration (20 years) are calculated correctly, this statement is TRUE.Option B: Incorrect While it is generally true that a barbell portfolio (extremely short and long maturities) has greater convexity than a bullet portfolio (intermediate maturities) with the same duration, the conclusion that it "always outperforms" is false.
Option C: Incorrect The statement claims that Duration, Convexity, and DV01 are all increasing functions of maturity. While duration and convexity generally increase as maturity increases, DV01 does not strictly increase forever.
Option D: Incorrect This statement suggests that portfolio convexity is not a weighted average of individual convexities. This is false.
The correct option is A.
Ultimate access to all questions.
No comments yet.
Which of the following is TRUE?
A
If a consol (perpetual) bond with a $100 face value pays a 3.0% coupon in perpetuity and the yield is 5.0%, the consol’s price is $60 and its modified duration is 20 years.
B
Since a BARBELL bond portfolio has greater convexity than a BULLET, the barbell always outperforms
C
Duration, convexity and DV01 are all (each) increasing with maturity
D
Portfolio duration is weighted average of individual (component) durations but portfolio convexity is not a weighted average of individual convexities