1 In the discussion on the bond cash market we analyzed the risk associated with duration mismatches. In the bank immunization case, a financial institution immunized itself from interest rate risk by adjusting the durations of its asset and liability portfolios. In the planning period case, immunization was achieved by setting the duration of a bond portfolio equal to the length of the planning period. Often, such immunization may be difficult and costly to achieve by operations in the cash bond market alone. For example, banks cannot turn away depositors because they wish to lengthen the duration of their liabilities. Bond Portfolio Immunization Bond Portfolio Immunization With Interest Rate Futures With Interest Rate Futures
25
Embed
1 In the discussion on the bond cash market we analyzed the risk associated with duration mismatches. In the bank immunization case, a financial institution.
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
In the discussion on the bond cash market we analyzed the risk associated with duration mismatches. In the bank immunization case, a financial institution immunized itself from interest rate risk by adjusting the durations of its asset and liability portfolios. In the planning period case, immunization was achieved by setting the duration of a bond portfolio equal to the length of the planning period. Often, such immunization may be difficult and costly to achieve by operations in the cash bond market alone. For example, banks cannot turn away depositors because they wish to lengthen the duration of their liabilities.
Bond Portfolio Immunization With Bond Portfolio Immunization With Interest Rate FuturesInterest Rate Futures
2
With the development of interest rate futures markets over the past 30 years, financial managers have a valuable tool to use in bond portfolio immunization strategies.Two examples of immunization with interest rate futures, one for the planning period case and one for the bank immunization case, are presented here. Table A presents data on the bonds used in the examples, along with data for T-bill and T-bond futures contracts. The table reflects the assumption of a flat yield curve and instruments of the same risk level.
3
Table A: Instruments for the Immunization Table A: Instruments for the Immunization AnalysisAnalysis
Coupon Maturity Yield Price Duration
A $1,000 8% 4 yrs. 12% $885.59 3.475
B $1,000 10% 10 yrs. 12% $903.47 6.265
C $1,000 4% 15 yrs. 12% $463.05 9.285
T-Bond Futures
$100,000
8% 20 yrs. 12% $71,875 8.674
T-Bill Futures
$1,000,000 ¼ yr. 12% $972,070 .25
Bond FV
4
The 6-year Planning Period CaseThe 6-year Planning Period CaseConsider a $100 million invested in Bond C. This portfolio’s duration is 9.285 years.The portfolio manager wants to shorten the portfolio duration to 6 years in order to match a 6-year planning period. In this case, the decision is to sell some of Bond C and buy some of Bond A. Mathematically, the conditions are:
where W is the percentage of portfolio funds invested in the corresponding asset . The solution is: put 56.54% of the $100 million in Bond A, and 43.46% in bond C.Call this Portfolio1 – using the cash market only.
1WW
6yearsDWDW
CA
CCAA
1WW
6yearsDWDW
CA
CCAA
5
The 6-year Planning Period CaseThe 6-year Planning Period Case
Alternatively, the portfolio’s duration may be adjusted to match the six-year planning period by trading interest rate futures.In Portfolio 2, the manager keeps the original portfolio of $100,000,000 in Bond C and trades T-bill futures to adjust the duration of the combined portfolio of Bond C and futures.
6
The 6-year Planning Period CaseThe 6-year Planning Period Case
Portfolio 2: Bond C and T-bill futures. Let
VP = value of the portfolio
Pi = price of Bond i; i=A,B,C
Ni= number of Bond i; i=A,B,C
FT-bill= T-bill futures price
NT-bill= number of T-bills contracts
FT-bond= T-bond futures price
NT-bond= number of T-bond contracts
Notice that VP = PCNC = $100,000,000. This is so,because the futures require no initial investment.The planning period is 6 years, thus:
7
The following equation must hold:The following equation must hold:
13.14.w
:is solution The
(.25).w9.2856
:becomes condition above theand
1 w Hence,C. Bondin invested
are 00$100,000,0 original entire The
6.DwDwD
bill-T
bill-T
C
billTbill-TCCP
13.14.w
:is solution The
(.25).w9.2856
:becomes condition above theand
1 w Hence,C. Bondin invested
are 00$100,000,0 original entire The
6.DwDwD
bill-T
bill-T
C
billTbill-TCCP
8
How many T-bill contracts?Solving for NT-bill we obtain:
years.6exactly is duration
sportfolio' combined efutures.Th bill-T
1,352short and C bond of$100M Hold
1,352.N
,00$100,000,0
)$972,070(N13.14-
:caseour In .V
NF w
billT
bill-T
P
billTbill-Tbill-T
9
The same technique used to create Portfolio 2 can be appliedusing a T-bond futures contract, giving rise to Portfolio 3. Solving:
.378718.w
:is solution The
(8.674).w9.2856
:becomes condition above theand
1 w Hence,C. Bondin invested
are 00$100,000,0 original entire The
6.DwDwD
bill-T
bond-T
C
bondTbond-TCCP
.378718.w
:is solution The
(8.674).w9.2856
:becomes condition above theand
1 w Hence,C. Bondin invested
are 00$100,000,0 original entire The
6.DwDwD
bill-T
bond-T
C
bondTbond-TCCP
10
The 6-year Planning Period CaseThe 6-year Planning Period CaseHow many T-bond contracts?Solving for NT-bond we obtain:
years.6exactly
is duration sportfolio' combined The futures.
bond-T 527short and C bond in$100M Hold
527.N
,00$100,000,0
)$71,875(N.378718-
:caseour In .V
NF w
bond-T
bond-T
P
bondTbond-Tbond-T
11
Table B Portfolio Characteristics for the 6-year Table B Portfolio Characteristics for the 6-year Planning Period CasePlanning Period Case
Portfolio 1Bonds Only
Portfolio 2Bonds and Futures
Portfolio 3Bonds and Futures
Portfolio WA 56.54% 0 0
Weights WC 43.43% 1.0 1.0 WT-bill 0 -13.14 0
WT-bond 0 0 -.378718
Number of NC 93,856 215,9590
215,959
Instruments NA 63,844 0
NT-bill 0 - 1,352contracts short 0
Value NT-bond0 0 - 527contracts shorts
of Each NCPC $43,460,021 $100,000,0000
$100,000,000
Instrument NAPA $56,539,608 0 NT-billFT-bill 0 $1,314,238,640 short 0
NT-bondFT-bond 0 0 $37,878,125 short
Portfolio Value $100,000,000 $100,000,000 $100,000,000
12
To see how these three immunized portfolios perform,
assume:1. Interest rate falls from 12% to 11% for all
maturities.2. All coupon receipts during the six-year planning
period can be reinvested at 11% until the end of the planning period.
With the shift in interest rates the new prices are:PA= $913.57; PC= $504.33;
FT-bill = $974,250; FT-bond= $77,813.
13
The 6-year Planning Period CaseThe 6-year Planning Period Case
Table C below, shows the effect of the interest rate shift on portfolio values, the terminal wealth at the 6-year planning period end and on the total wealth position of the portfolio holder. As the Table reveals, each portfolio responds similarly to the shift in yields.The table demonstrates that the annualized holding period rate of return on every one of the three Portfolios remains 12%. The slight differences aredue to either rounding errors or the fact that the duration price change formula holds exactly only for infinitesimal changes in yields.
14
Table C: The Effect of a 1% Drop in Yields on Table C: The Effect of a 1% Drop in Yields on realized Portfolio Returnsrealized Portfolio Returns
Portfolio 1 Portfolio 2 Portfolio 3
Initial Portfolio Value $100,000,000 $100,000,000 $100,000,000
New Portfolio Value $105,660,731 $108,914,787 $108,914,787
Gain/ Loss on Futures 0 <$2,946,808> <$3,128,792>
Total Wealth Change $5,660,731 $5,967,979 $5,785,995
Terminal Value of all Funds at n = 6
$197,629,369 $198,204,050 $197,868,664
Annualized Holding Period Return over 6 Years
1.12 1.12 1.12
Source: From R. Kolb and G. Gay, “ Immunizing Bond Portfolios with Interest Rate Futures,” Financial Management, Summer 1982, pp. 81-89. Reprinted by permission of Financial Management Association, University of South Florida, College of Business, Tampa, FL 33620 (813) 974-2084
15
The 6-year Planning Period CaseThe 6-year Planning Period Case
One important concern in the implementation of immunization strategies is the cost involved. In immunizing, commission charges, marketability, and liquidity of the instruments involved become increasingly important.These considerations highlight the practical usefulness of interest rate futures in bond portfolio management. We now analyze the cost of the 6-year planning period case.
16
The 6-year Planning period CaseThe 6-year Planning period Case
Let us analyze the cost of implementing the 6-year planning period case.The transaction costs associated with the different portfolios for the 6-year planning period case, starting from the initial position of $100,000,000 in Bond C, and shortening the duration to six years. Table F shows the trades necessary and the estimated costs involved. Assume:Commission fee for bond trading: $5/bondCost of trading futures contracts: $20/contract
17
Table F: Transaction Costs for the 6-year Table F: Transaction Costs for the 6-year Planning Period CasePlanning Period Case
Portfolio 1 Portfolio 2 Portfolio 3
NA Long 63,844 - -
NC Short 122,103 - -
NT-bill - Short 1,352 -
NT-bond - - Short 527
One Way Transaction Cost
Bond A @ $5/bond $319,220 - -
Bond C @ $5/bond $610,515 - -
T-Bill Futures $20/contract
- $27,040 -
T-Bond Futures $20/contract
- - $10,540
Total Cost of Implementation
$929,735 $27,040 $10,540
18
The 6-year Planning Period CaseThe 6-year Planning Period CaseTo implement Portfolio 1, one must sell 122,103 bonds of type C and buy 63,844 bonds of type A. Assuming a commission charge of $5 per bond, the total commission is $929,735. By contrast one could short 1,352 T-bill futures contracts to implement Portfolio 2, at total cost of $27,040. Alternatively, Portfolio 3 implies a short of 527 T-bond futures at a total cost of $10,540. In addition, margin deposits of approximately $2,000,000 for Portfolio 2 or, $800,000 for Portfolio 3 are required. Of course, margin deposits may be in the form of interest earning assets.
19
The 6-year Planning Period CaseThe 6-year Planning Period CaseClearly, there is a tremendous difference in transaction costs between trading the bonds in the cash market and futures contracts. The cost of shorting the 1,352 T-bill futures is a small percentage of the daily volume or recent open interest. Likewise, the 527 T-bond futures constitute only a trivial fraction of the volume and open interest in that market. The evident ability of the futures market to absorb the kind of activity involved in this example demonstrates the practical usefulness rate futures in managing bond portfolios. Notice, however, that the futures will have to be rolled over when their delivery month arrives. This roll-over presents some risk associated with these strategies.
20
The Bank Immunization CaseThe Bank Immunization CaseWe now, turn to the example of the bank immunization case. Assume that a bank holds a $100,000,000 liability portfolio in Bond B. The bank wishes to protect it’s wealth position from any change which might ensue a change in yields.Five different portfolio combinations illustrate different means to achieve the desired result:
ASSETS LIABILITYPortfolio 1: Bond A and Bond C. Bond B. Portfolio 2: Bond C; sell T-bill futures. Bond B.Portfolio 3: Bond A; buy T-bond future Bond B.Portfolio 4: Bond A; buy T-bill futures. Bond B.Portfolio 5: Bond C; sell T-bond futures. Bond B.
21
The Bank Immunization CaseThe Bank Immunization Case
For each portfolio in Table D, the full $100,000,000 is put in a bond portfolio and is balanced out by cash. Portfolio 1 exemplifies the traditional approach of immunizing by holding only bonds. Portfolio 2 and Portfolio 5 are composed of Bond C and a short futures position. By contrast, the low volatility Bond A is held in Portfolio 3 and Portfolio 4. In conjunction with Bond A, the overall interest rate sensitivity is increased by buying interest rate futures.
Table 8.28: Liability Portfolio and Five Alternative Immunizing Table 8.28: Liability Portfolio and Five Alternative Immunizing PortfoliosPortfolios
The Bank Immunization CaseThe Bank Immunization CaseIs the banks wealth immunized against market yield change?To answer this question, assume an instantaneous drop in rates from 12% to 11% for all maturities. Table E shows the effect of the 1% drop on the portfolios. As the rows reporting wealth change reveal, all five portfolios perform similarly. The small differences stem from rounding errors and the discrete change in interest rates. Table E below, demonstrates that all five portfolios may serve to immunize the bank’s wealth. For all five portfolios, the wealth change which ensues a yield change is virtually zero.
24
Table E: The Effect of a 1% Drop in Yields Table E: The Effect of a 1% Drop in Yields
on Total Wealthon Total Wealth Liability Portfolio 1 Portfolio 2 Portfolio 3 Portfolio 4 Portfolio 5
Source: From R. Kolb and G. Gay, “ Immunizing Bond Portfolios with Interest Rate Futures,” Financial Management, Summer 1982, pp. 81-89. Reprinted by permission of Financial Management Association, University of South Florida, College of Business, Tampa, FL 33620 (813) 974-2084
25
Conclusion:Until recently, immunization strategies for bond portfolios have traditionally focused on all bond portfolios. The analyses of the 6-year Planning Period case and The Bank Immunization case have shown that interest rate futures can be used in conjunction with bond portfolios to provide the same kind of immunization. Both examples assumed parallel shifting yield curves. If the change in interest rates brings about non-parallel shifts in the yield curve, then the traditional, “bonds only” portfolio as well as the “bond-with-futures” approaches will give different results. Which method turns out to be superior would depend upon the pattern of interest rate changes that actually occurred.