Kim Simpson, CFA, manages a $75 million multi-cap growth portfolio. Simpson utilizes a growth at a reasonable price (GARP) investment strategy and her investment universe consists of small, medium and large capitalization stocks. She turns the entire portfolio over once each year. Simpson is concerned about the amount of trading costs she has generated through the implementation of her investment strategy.
Simpson decides to conduct a trade cost analysis with the cooperation of her trader, Janet Long, CFA.
Simpson believes the results of the trading analysis can be used to improve trading performance and help to refine her investment strategy. The first trade they examine is a purchase of 2000 shares of Technology Company that was completed using a market order. Simpson remembers adding to her Technology Company position based on her analyst's recommendation that the company was going to generate earnings significantly above the consensus estimate in a soon to be released earnings report. The order was split into two trades as shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Technology Company buy order for 2000 shares
In conducting a comprehensive analysis of the trading markets, Simpson states that she is most concerned about market liquidity. Simpson defines a market with good liquidity as one with diversity of opinion, many buyers/sellers and relatively wide bid-ask spreads. In addition to reviewing market liquidity, Simpson believes that, in order to assess market quality, both the ease with which investors can obtain accurate information and the certainty that a trade will be completed must be evaluated.
Simpson and Long review their trade of Nano Corporation, a small biotechnology company. Simpson used a limit order because her analyst had established a specific buy target and she wanted to hold down transaction costs. To handle both explicit and implicit trading costs, Simpson measures execution costs using implementation shortfall. The buy order for 100,000 shares of Nano stock has the following timeline:
* Nano stock price closes at $35.00 per share.
* Day one: Simpson places a limit order for 100,000 shares of Nano stock at $34.75 per share or better at the opening of trading. However, Nano's stock never falls below $35.00 per share and closes at $36.50 per share.
* Day two: Simpson adjusts her limit order price to $37.00 per share or better. Long is able to fill 50,000 shares of the order at $36.75 per share. Nano's stock climbs to $38.00 per share during the day and Simpson moves the limit price to $40.00 per share or better. Long completes the purchase of the remaining 50,000 shares of Nano at $40.00 per share, which is also the closing price of Nano's stock.
* The commission for each block trade is $2,500.
Long suggests implementing the Best Execution concept as established by the CFA Institute in its Trade Management Guidelines. Long states best execution would accept a high portfolio turnover strategy provided the overall portfolio value is greater after trading costs. Long asserts that her professional relationships are integral to best execution.
Regarding Long's statements on best execution, determine whether her mention of professional relationships and high portfolio turnover are most likely correct or incorrect.
A. Both statements are correct.
B. Only the statement about high portfolio turnover is correct.
C. Only the statement about business relationships is correct.
Answer: C
Explanation:
Explanation/Reference:
Explanation:
CFA Institute's Trade Management Guidelines established the following four characteristics for Best Execution, as summarized on page 132, Level 3 SchweserNotes Book 5:
1. Trading relationships and practices are important elements of best execution.
2. Trading is a negotiated agreement between two parties that cannot be known before the fact.
3. Trading cannot be viewed separately from the investment decisions. As long as trading achieves the value of the investment decision it can be considered best execution.
4. Trading should be evaluated in totality and not on any single trade. In other words, the trading process should be evaluated through all trades that were performed.
Business relationships are indeed integral to the concept of best execution. Also, high portfolio turnover, in and of itself, does not necessarily imply the manager is not pursuing a best execution strategy. Best execution, concerned with the implementation of portfolio decisions, implies that trades should generate the intended value, and this says nothing about the frequency of trading. In the vignette we are not told whether the considerable portfolio turnover (once per year) is excessive or whether it is an intentional strategy designed to achieve the intended increase in wealth. If over many trades the strategy produces the intended wealth gain, we could potentially classify it as best execution. In this case, with no information other than "as long as the portfolio value is greater after trading costs," we would most likely conclude this does nor meet CFA Institute guidelines for best execution.
(Study Session 16, LOS 45-n)
