Fight Finance

(a) The before-tax cost of debt is less than the before-tax cost of equity. Therefore debt is a cheaper form of financing than equity so companies should try to finance their projects with debt only.

(b) Debt makes a firm's equity more risky. Therefore the higher the amount of debt, the higher the cost of equity.

(c) The more debt a firm has, the higher its tax shields. Therefore firms should seek to have as much debt and as little equity as possible.

(d) The more debt, the lower the firm's after tax WACC. The after tax WACC is the discount rate that discounts the firm's cash flows, so the lower it is the more the firm is worth. Therefore firms should try to make their after tax WACC as low as possible by using as much debt as possible.

(e) The less debt, the lower the chance of bankruptcy. Therefore firms should try to pay off all of their debt so that they are financed by equity only.

(a) 17,435.74

(b) 1,438.92

(c) 1,414.49

(d) 1,200.00

(e) 666.67

(a) ##P_{2.5}=P_0 (1+g)^{2.5} ##

(b) ##P_{2.5}=P_0 (1+r)^{2.5} ##

(c) ##P_{2.5}=P_0 (1+g)^2 (1+r)^{0.5} ##

(d) ##P_{2.5}=P_0 (1+r)^2 (1+g)^{0.5} ##

(e) ##P_{2.5}=P_0 (1+r)^3 (1+g)^{-0.5} ##

(a) 0.277075

(b) 0.272519

(c) 0.239954

(d) 0.236008

(e) 0.162070

(a) Are discount bonds.

(b) Have positive expected capital returns.

(c) Have higher expected income returns than total returns.

(d) Have prices less than their face values.

(e) Have significant credit risk.

(a) 98.04 JPY per AUD.

(b) 100 JPY per AUD.

(c) 102 JPY per AUD.

(d) 1.02 AUD per JPY.

(e) 0.9804 AUD per JPY.

(a) Prefer more to less, meaning that they will always like to have more wealth.

(b) Be risk averse, meaning that they dislike risk as measured by the standard deviation of wealth.

(c) Have a positively sloped utility function, so the gradient or first derivative of the utility function is always positive.

(d) Have a utility function that increases at a diminishing rate. So the shape is concave down like a frown, or the second derivative is always negative.

(e) Have a utility function that rises until it reaches the satiation point, then it falls because too much wealth causes problems.

(a) Prices, ##P_1##.

(b) Gross discrete returns per annum, ##r_{\text{gdr 0 }\rightarrow \text{ 1}} = \dfrac{P_1}{P_0} ##.

(c) Effective annual returns per annum also known as net discrete returns, ##r_{\text{eff 0 }\rightarrow \text{ 1}} = \dfrac{P_1 - P_0}{P_0} = \dfrac{P_1}{P_0}-1##.

(d) Continuously compounded returns per annum, ##r_{\text{cc 0 }\rightarrow \text{ 1}} = \ln \left( \dfrac{P_1}{P_0} \right)##.

(e) Annualised percentage rates compounding per month, ##r_{\text{apr comp monthly 0 }\rightarrow \text{ 1 mth}} = \left( \dfrac{P_1 - P_0}{P_0} \right) \times 12##.

(a) The 1 year zero coupon spot yield per annum compounding annually is 0% pa.

(b) The 2 year zero coupon spot yield per annum compounding annually is 1.0100025% pa.

(c) The 3 year zero coupon spot yield per annum compounding annually is 2.0272812% pa.

(d) The 1 to 2 year zero coupon forward rate per annum compounding annually is 3.030206% pa.

(e) The 2 to 3 year zero coupon forward rate per annum compounding annually is 4.0926772% pa.

(a) Buffett is clever and by reading the news and financial reports he is able to buy under-priced stocks and sell over-priced stocks. This provides evidence for rejecting the semi-strong and strong form EMH.

(b) Buffett was lucky, his strategy happened to be the right one, not due to its merits, just by chance. This provides no evidence for or against the weak, semi-strong or strong form EMH.

(c) Buffett’s investment strategy exposes investors to higher undiversifiable risk than the market and therefore deserves a higher return. This provides no evidence for or against the weak, semi-strong or strong form EMH.

(d) Buffett is an insider trader and is able to make money from his private information. This provides evidence for rejecting the semi-strong and strong form EMH. (Note: Warren Buffett is not an insider trader, he is an honest philanthropist, but assume the contrary in this answer option).

(e) Buffett may not have beaten the market because the graphs ignore dividends - the S&P500 is the price index rather than the accumulation index and BRK pays no dividends, so even though BRK has a higher capital return than the S&P500, the total returns could be equal. This provides no evidence for or against the weak, semi-strong or strong form EMH.