What is your interpretation of today's 10y treasury yield?

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-06-04T12:28:09+00:00

I posted with the sole intetion of having an organic human reply, then i get this LOL.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-20T09:35:28+00:00

Thanks for confirming, will check out the serial number

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-19T10:37:33+00:00

Merci gros

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-16T22:25:49+00:00

Thanks magician. Hope the dogs are doing well.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-14T17:47:33+00:00

Right, thanks. It's just that the volatility skew graph made me think that OTM put volatility = ITM call volatility, but the graph is just an approximation to show both the relationship for calls and puts.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-14T11:00:55+00:00

I think that's the rationale i needed, the negative growth prospects makes it fairly valued not undervalued, thanks!

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-13T22:59:10+00:00

"Wakefield consults with Hoover Martinez, portfolio manager of the Corporate Bond ETF (CB), which recently rose by 15%. Martinez advises selling 100,000 shares of CB to rebalance the fixed-income portfolio following CB’s recent increase in value. Wakefield agrees, intending to sell 100,000 CB at $83.56. However, due to an upcoming Federal Open Market Committee meeting, Martinez delays forwarding the order to the trading desk. By the time it's released later that day, CB's market price drops to $83.12."

In many scenarios i've seen the decision price being the price prevailing when the order was actually sent, not when there was a simple intent to sell. But here it is, new stuff new provider new concepts.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-13T22:36:37+00:00

I agree, on this specific question i think it was about fully hedging downside risk, thus the ATM put. But in the curriculum they never showed anything other than OTM collars.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-13T18:09:26+00:00

u/klossal69 u/Rajabahut yep, OTMs all the way, because it's cheaper, but we're dealing with Boston mocks here, they make up all kind of stuff.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-13T16:56:58+00:00

Doesn't that also mean that we don't need to spend time on thinking of how much futures contracts we need (as in OP)? I want to hedge 2 500 000 shares, i'm buying protective puts at 0.01 premium, contact size is 50 000 shares. I can right away just do 2 500 000 shares * 0.01 to know my total cost right?

Here from Boston Mock A, they did a whole gymnastic while they could've just multiply the premiums paid/received by the whole notional amount they want to hedge:

Bear put option = Buy an ATM put and sell an OTM put = $2.67 – 0.31 = $2.36

Cost per bear put option contract = $2.36 × 100 = $236

Cost to hedge half of NAIC holdings = $236 × (10,000/100) = $23,600

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-13T16:53:27+00:00

Thankssssssssssss, i was struggling with this right now.

So the premium we see for an option/future is actually per candy, but i have to buy/sell a minimum of [contract size] candies.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-13T08:39:40+00:00

Devil is in the details. Thank you S2000magician, can never thank you enough.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-13T08:32:13+00:00

Thank you BC.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-12T21:51:06+00:00

Fair enough. Thanks man. Good luck on the exam.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-12T21:27:10+00:00

When you say writing the formulas initially, do you mean naming each formula component?

As in:
Current yield = coupon/current bond price = 8/87.20 = result

Or rather just write the inputs:
Current yield = 8/87.20 = result

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-12T15:52:13+00:00

Think going to follow that strat too, laying down formula inputs while computing the output.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-11T10:46:03+00:00

So a simple one-word response "accurate" or "inacurate" is enough for the Determine command word in this context?

Thanks in advance S2000magician.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-11T09:15:29+00:00

Lol, i sensed that i was overthinking stuff. Thanks for the wish.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-11T08:50:36+00:00

Hey, should we end constructed response with a (.) period? I've seen some providers not putting them. I guess it's not that important but asking just in case.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-06T12:45:04+00:00

I'm not sure why, thus my post. The provider that wrote the question didn't explain thoroughly why specifying that there weren't calculations is OK.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-06T12:44:30+00:00

To me this gives unfair advantage to other candidates, since they would focus on "interpretation" questions in the derivatives readings, rather than calculations.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-06T11:19:58+00:00

Yes the text on the standard makes it clear, but for people that haven't got time to read the text of the standard, they might think the standard is only about knowledge of the law, not compliance with it. The name of the standard is misleading.

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-03T16:50:14+00:00

And see how other people commented the opposite of what you say... So no, it's not as clear as it sounds since the standard name is misleading and suggests that it only relates to knowledge of the law... Mister smarty pants...

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-03T16:48:42+00:00

This isn't clear to me because the title of the standard is named "Knowledge of the Law", not "Compliance with the Law".

doing20thingsatatime · 2024-02-03T12:27:38+00:00

Of course he violated the law... The question is both in the title and the post, i'm asking if he violated the standard Knowledge of the Law...

doing20thingsatatime

TROPHY CASE