1. Over the entire five years, what was the time-weighted compound annual rate of return and the comparable rate of return on the market?

2. Was your return more or less volatile than the market? Did your investors bear more or less systematic risk than the market?

3. Were your returns more or less variable than the market returns?

4. Do your answers to questions 2 and 3 indicate that your portfolio was more or less risky than the market?

5. Over the entire five years, what was the dollar-weighted compound annual rate of return?

6. If an individual bought 100 shares (i.e., $1,000) at the beginning of year 1, how much did the investor have in the account at the end of year 5 assuming that all cash distributions were reinvested in your fund at the year-end values? Based on these beginning and ending values, what was the annual rate of return?

7. Why do the rates calculated in Questions 1, 5, and 6 differ?

8. If an individual invested $1,000 at the beginning of each year, how much did the investor have in the account at the end of year 5 if cash distributions were also reinvested? (Assume that the year-end values are the beginning values of the subsequent year.) Using this strategy, the dollar-weighted internal rate of return is almost 20 percent. Why is the annual rate so much higher than those in which the investor made only the initial investment? Which of these rates best indicates your performance even when the individual invests $1,000 each year?

MINI CASE 

As a portfolio manager, you are required to provide clients with a measure of your performance, a comparison with the market, and a measure of risk. Initially, your portfolio was worth $10 a share. During the last five years, the ending values of the port folio, the cash distributions, and the annual return on the market were as follows:

Transcribed Image Text:

Ending Value of Cash Market Return 12% 17 Year Your Portfolio Distributed $10.50 12.00 11.25 12.50 14.00 $0.30 1.00 0.50 1.00 1.25 14