support@Free-Braindumps.com
Register Login
Cisco
CompTIA
ISC
EC-Council
EXIN
Fortinet
ITIL
Juniper
Microsoft
VMware
Avaya
SAP
Google
NVIDIA
Salesforce
Amazon
Palo Alto Networks
ISC2
Splunk
ServiceNow
All Vendors
  1. Home
  2. Exams
  3. CFA
  4. CFA-Level-III

CFA CFA-Level-III Exam Prep
CFA Level III Chartered Financial Analyst (Page 36 )

Updated On: 20-Aug-2026
Page 14 of 74
PDF with 472 Questions

Cindy Hatcher, CFA, has spent the last ten years as a portfolio manager with Bernhardt Capital. While working for Bernhardt, Hatcher was responsible for maintaining and improving the company's code of ethics and guidelines for ethical money management. As a result of Hatcher's efforts, Bernhardt saw a dramatic decline in the number of complaints received from their individual and institutional customers.
One of Bernhardt's direct competitors, Smith Investments, is keenly aware of Hatcher's reputation for ethical business practices and has offered her a job as their compliance officer. Hatcher has been apprised of several potential ethical problems at Smith that she will be directly responsible for fixing through implementation of policies and procedures that will prevent ethical dilemmas. The management at Smith is willing to grant Hatcher the authority to construct and implement policies to eliminate the ethical problems at the company.

Hatcher agrees to accept the position with Smith and resigns from employment with Bernhardt. As her first initiative with the company, Hatcher distributes to all employees at Smith a survey intended to acquaint her with the company's common business practices. Her goal is to identify those factors that are most likely to interfere with Smith's compliance with the CFA Institute's Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice. After collecting and analyzing the anonymous responses to the survey, Hatcher has identified the following four issues as the most frequently cited questionable business practices:
1. Many Smith employees have relatives who are clients of the firm. For relatives* accounts where the Smith employee does not have beneficial ownership, trades are generally executed in conjunction with trades for other discretionary accounts held at the firm. Only in accounts where the Smith employee has beneficial ownership are trades delayed until all discretionary account trading is completed.
2. Many of Smith's employees either personally own or maintain, through a family member, beneficial ownership of stocks that are also held in accounts for many of the firm's clients. While the company maintains a strict disclosure policy to the firm of such beneficial ownership and an "at will" disclosure policy to its clients, employees are not barred from trading these securities for their personal benefit even if their clients also own or have a direct or indirect financial interest in the same securities.
3. Account managers meet weekly to discuss the issues and concerns of the client portfolios managed at the firm. During the meetings it is not unusual for individual clients to be identified and discussed. Information regarding the client's holdings and investment strategy is discussed as well as persona! needs related to the client's portfolio. The meetings are held in order to provide guidance and continuing education to all of the firm's account managers.
4. At the suggestion of fixed-income analysts at the firm, most of the portfolio managers working for Smith have been adding B-rated corporate fixed-income securities to their portfolios. Analysts originally made (and continue to make) the suggestion due to the attractive yield potential offered by this class of investments. Smith's portfolio managers were thrilled with the idea since the returns on many of the portfolios' equity positions have been stifled by high profile accounting scandals.
Management at Smith Investments has been pleased with Hatcher's efforts so far but is concerned about the firm's ability to maintain compliance with the CFA Institute's Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®). The managing director of the firm, Erich Prince, has made the following comments to Hatcher:
"I am concerned that we will not be able to claim compliance with GIPS at the end of the year since our new information system has inhibited our ability to include terminated portfolios in the historical record up to the last full measurement period before they were terminated. Also, we are unable to regroup portfolios that utilize hedging into separate composites from those that do not utilize hedging. These portfolios are currently grouped according to traditional value and growth strategies based on the capitalization of portfolio holdings (i.e., large vs. small)."
Hatcher eases Prince's mind by telling him she will "ensure full compliance with GIPS by the end of the quarter."
Hatcher is concerned about Smith's policies related to disclosure of beneficial ownership of securities. Determine if Smith's disclosure policies are in violation of the CFA Institute Code and Standards and suggest a strategy to eliminate the violation if one exists.

  1. The policy violates the Code and Standards and can be fixed by barring employees from trading the conflicting securities.
  2. The policy violates the Code and Standards and can be fixed by requiring written disclosure to clients regarding Smith employees with beneficial ownership of conflicting securities.
  3. This particular policy does not violate the Code and Standards.

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

Standard VI(A) requires that conflicts of interest be disclosed to clients and prospects. This disclosure applies to beneficial ownership of securities that could affect the impartiality of the professional’s investment recommendations or actions. Smith's policy of optional disclosure to clients and prospects is not strict enough. Disclosure is mandatory. (Study Session 1, LOS 2.a)



Cindy Hatcher, CFA, has spent the last ten years as a portfolio manager with Bernhardt Capital. While working for Bernhardt, Hatcher was responsible for maintaining and improving the company's code of ethics and guidelines for ethical money management. As a result of Hatcher's efforts, Bernhardt saw a dramatic decline in the number of complaints received from their individual and institutional customers.
One of Bernhardt's direct competitors, Smith Investments, is keenly aware of Hatcher's reputation for ethical business practices and has offered her a job as their compliance officer. Hatcher has been apprised of several potential ethical problems at Smith that she will be directly responsible for fixing through implementation of policies and procedures that will prevent ethical dilemmas. The management at Smith is willing to grant Hatcher the authority to construct and implement policies to eliminate the ethical problems at the company.

Hatcher agrees to accept the position with Smith and resigns from employment with Bernhardt. As her first initiative with the company, Hatcher distributes to all employees at Smith a survey intended to acquaint her with the company's common business practices. Her goal is to identify those factors that are most likely to interfere with Smith's compliance with the CFA Institute's Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice. After collecting and analyzing the anonymous responses to the survey, Hatcher has identified the following four issues as the most frequently cited questionable business practices:
1. Many Smith employees have relatives who are clients of the firm. For relatives* accounts where the Smith employee does not have beneficial ownership, trades are generally executed in conjunction with trades for other discretionary accounts held at the firm. Only in accounts where the Smith employee has beneficial ownership are trades delayed until all discretionary account trading is completed.
2. Many of Smith's employees either personally own or maintain, through a family member, beneficial ownership of stocks that are also held in accounts for many of the firm's clients. While the company maintains a strict disclosure policy to the firm of such beneficial ownership and an "at will" disclosure policy to its clients, employees are not barred from trading these securities for their personal benefit even if their clients also own or have a direct or indirect financial interest in the same securities.
3. Account managers meet weekly to discuss the issues and concerns of the client portfolios managed at the firm. During the meetings it is not unusual for individual clients to be identified and discussed. Information regarding the client's holdings and investment strategy is discussed as well as persona! needs related to the client's portfolio. The meetings are held in order to provide guidance and continuing education to all of the firm's account managers.
4. At the suggestion of fixed-income analysts at the firm, most of the portfolio managers working for Smith have been adding B-rated corporate fixed-income securities to their portfolios. Analysts originally made (and continue to make) the suggestion due to the attractive yield potential offered by this class of investments. Smith's portfolio managers were thrilled with the idea since the returns on many of the portfolios' equity positions have been stifled by high profile accounting scandals.
Management at Smith Investments has been pleased with Hatcher's efforts so far but is concerned about the firm's ability to maintain compliance with the CFA Institute's Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®). The managing director of the firm, Erich Prince, has made the following comments to Hatcher:
"I am concerned that we will not be able to claim compliance with GIPS at the end of the year since our new information system has inhibited our ability to include terminated portfolios in the historical record up to the last full measurement period before they were terminated. Also, we are unable to regroup portfolios that utilize hedging into separate composites from those that do not utilize hedging. These portfolios are currently grouped according to traditional value and growth strategies based on the capitalization of portfolio holdings (i.e., large vs. small)."
Hatcher eases Prince's mind by telling him she will "ensure full compliance with GIPS by the end of the quarter."

Which of the following procedures should Hatcher enact to ensure that Smith Investments is in compliance with Standard IV(B.5) Preservation of Confidentiality? Prohibit:

  1. discussion of clients' individual needs at the weekly meetings of account managers.
  2. discussion of clients' holdings and investment strategy at the weekly meetings of account managers.
  3. identification of clients being discussed at the weekly meetings of account managers.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

Standard 111(E) requires members to preserve client confidentiality unless the client is engaged in illegal activities or an investigation by the CFA Institute requires disclosure of confidential client information. The managers are allowed to discuss strategies and other issues to better serve their clients as long as they maintain the confidentiality of each client. (Study Session 1, LOS 2.a)



Cindy Hatcher, CFA, has spent the last ten years as a portfolio manager with Bernhardt Capital. While working for Bernhardt, Hatcher was responsible for maintaining and improving the company's code of ethics and guidelines for ethical money management. As a result of Hatcher's efforts, Bernhardt saw a dramatic decline in the number of complaints received from their individual and institutional customers.
One of Bernhardt's direct competitors, Smith Investments, is keenly aware of Hatcher's reputation for ethical business practices and has offered her a job as their compliance officer. Hatcher has been apprised of several potential ethical problems at Smith that she will be directly responsible for fixing through implementation of policies and procedures that will prevent ethical dilemmas. The management at Smith is willing to grant Hatcher the authority to construct and implement policies to eliminate the ethical problems at the company.

Hatcher agrees to accept the position with Smith and resigns from employment with Bernhardt. As her first initiative with the company, Hatcher distributes to all employees at Smith a survey intended to acquaint her with the company's common business practices. Her goal is to identify those factors that are most likely to interfere with Smith's compliance with the CFA Institute's Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice. After collecting and analyzing the anonymous responses to the survey, Hatcher has identified the following four issues as the most frequently cited questionable business practices:
1. Many Smith employees have relatives who are clients of the firm. For relatives* accounts where the Smith employee does not have beneficial ownership, trades are generally executed in conjunction with trades for other discretionary accounts held at the firm. Only in accounts where the Smith employee has beneficial ownership are trades delayed until all discretionary account trading is completed.
2. Many of Smith's employees either personally own or maintain, through a family member, beneficial ownership of stocks that are also held in accounts for many of the firm's clients. While the company maintains a strict disclosure policy to the firm of such beneficial ownership and an "at will" disclosure policy to its clients, employees are not barred from trading these securities for their personal benefit even if their clients also own or have a direct or indirect financial interest in the same securities.
3. Account managers meet weekly to discuss the issues and concerns of the client portfolios managed at the firm. During the meetings it is not unusual for individual clients to be identified and discussed. Information regarding the client's holdings and investment strategy is discussed as well as persona! needs related to the client's portfolio. The meetings are held in order to provide guidance and continuing education to all of the firm's account managers.
4. At the suggestion of fixed-income analysts at the firm, most of the portfolio managers working for Smith have been adding B-rated corporate fixed-income securities to their portfolios. Analysts originally made (and continue to make) the suggestion due to the attractive yield potential offered by this class of investments. Smith's portfolio managers were thrilled with the idea since the returns on many of the portfolios' equity positions have been stifled by high profile accounting scandals.
Management at Smith Investments has been pleased with Hatcher's efforts so far but is concerned about the firm's ability to maintain compliance with the CFA Institute's Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®). The managing director of the firm, Erich Prince, has made the following comments to Hatcher:
"I am concerned that we will not be able to claim compliance with GIPS at the end of the year since our new information system has inhibited our ability to include terminated portfolios in the historical record up to the last full measurement period before they were terminated. Also, we are unable to regroup portfolios that utilize hedging into separate composites from those that do not utilize hedging. These portfolios are currently grouped according to traditional value and growth strategies based on the capitalization of portfolio holdings (i.e., large vs. small)."
Hatcher eases Prince's mind by telling him she will "ensure full compliance with GIPS by the end of the quarter."

Smith's portfolio managers have been adding B-rated corporate fixed-income securities to their portfolios at the recommendation of the firm's fixed-income analysts. With regard to this situation, Smith's employees have violated the CFA Institute's Code and Standards for which of the following reasons?

  1. Fixed-income analysts are recommending debt securities that are below an investment grade credit rating.
  2. Portfolio managers have failed to consider the investment policy statement of each portfolio before adding the fixed-income securities to the portfolios.
  3. Fixed-income analysts have failed to provide a detailed description of the investment characteristics of the corporate fixed-income securities to the portfolio managers.

Answer(s): B

Explanation:

The portfolio manager’s ac Smith Investments have violated Standard III (C) Suitability by failing to consider the suitability of the fixed-income investments for each individual portfolio. It is possible that some of the portfolios would meet the requirements to take on the risk of investing in below investment grade bonds but is unlikely that most of the firm's portfolios would have objectives and constraints that would allow below investment grade bonds into the portfolio. (Study Session 1, LOS 2.a)



Cindy Hatcher, CFA, has spent the last ten years as a portfolio manager with Bernhardt Capital. While working for Bernhardt, Hatcher was responsible for maintaining and improving the company's code of ethics and guidelines for ethical money management. As a result of Hatcher's efforts, Bernhardt saw a dramatic decline in the number of complaints received from their individual and institutional customers.
One of Bernhardt's direct competitors, Smith Investments, is keenly aware of Hatcher's reputation for ethical business practices and has offered her a job as their compliance officer. Hatcher has been apprised of several potential ethical problems at Smith that she will be directly responsible for fixing through implementation of policies and procedures that will prevent ethical dilemmas. The management at Smith is willing to grant Hatcher the authority to construct and implement policies to eliminate the ethical problems at the company.

Hatcher agrees to accept the position with Smith and resigns from employment with Bernhardt. As her first initiative with the company, Hatcher distributes to all employees at Smith a survey intended to acquaint her with the company's common business practices. Her goal is to identify those factors that are most likely to interfere with Smith's compliance with the CFA Institute's Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice. After collecting and analyzing the anonymous responses to the survey, Hatcher has identified the following four issues as the most frequently cited questionable business practices:
1. Many Smith employees have relatives who are clients of the firm. For relatives* accounts where the Smith employee does not have beneficial ownership, trades are generally executed in conjunction with trades for other discretionary accounts held at the firm. Only in accounts where the Smith employee has beneficial ownership are trades delayed until all discretionary account trading is completed.
2. Many of Smith's employees either personally own or maintain, through a family member, beneficial ownership of stocks that are also held in accounts for many of the firm's clients. While the company maintains a strict disclosure policy to the firm of such beneficial ownership and an "at will" disclosure policy to its clients, employees are not barred from trading these securities for their personal benefit even if their clients also own or have a direct or indirect financial interest in the same securities.
3. Account managers meet weekly to discuss the issues and concerns of the client portfolios managed at the firm. During the meetings it is not unusual for individual clients to be identified and discussed. Information regarding the client's holdings and investment strategy is discussed as well as persona! needs related to the client's portfolio. The meetings are held in order to provide guidance and continuing education to all of the firm's account managers.
4. At the suggestion of fixed-income analysts at the firm, most of the portfolio managers working for Smith have been adding B-rated corporate fixed-income securities to their portfolios. Analysts originally made (and continue to make) the suggestion due to the attractive yield potential offered by this class of investments. Smith's portfolio managers were thrilled with the idea since the returns on many of the portfolios' equity positions have been stifled by high profile accounting scandals.
Management at Smith Investments has been pleased with Hatcher's efforts so far but is concerned about the firm's ability to maintain compliance with the CFA Institute's Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®). The managing director of the firm, Erich Prince, has made the following comments to Hatcher:
"I am concerned that we will not be able to claim compliance with GIPS at the end of the year since our new information system has inhibited our ability to include terminated portfolios in the historical record up to the last full measurement period before they were terminated. Also, we are unable to regroup portfolios that utilize hedging into separate composites from those that do not utilize hedging. These portfolios are currently grouped according to traditional value and growth strategies based on the capitalization of portfolio holdings (i.e., large vs. small)."
Hatcher eases Prince's mind by telling him she will "ensure full compliance with GIPS by the end of the quarter."
Has Hatcher violated, either directly or indirectly, the CFA Institute Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice?

  1. Hatcher violated Standard III(E) Responsibilities of Supervisors by accepting the position with the knowledge that violations were occurring at Smith.
  2. Hatcher violated Standard 111(E) Responsibilities of Supervisors by failing to make an adequate effort to uncover potential violations at Smith Investments.
  3. Hatcher has not violated the Code or Standards.

Answer(s): C

Explanation:

There is no indication from the case that Hatcher is in violation of (he Code and Standards. Hatcher is allowed to accept a position where there are known violations as long as she will be granted sufficient latitude to eliminate such violations. Management at Smith Investments is hiring Hatcher to eliminate ethical violations at the company and giving her the proper power and authority. Hatcher is also taking reasonable measures (through the anonymous survey) to identify the violations of the Code and Standards. Hatcher is allowed to take a position with a direct competitor as long as she is not working for them secretly while still employed with Bernhardt. (Study Session 1, LOS 2.a)



Cindy Hatcher, CFA, has spent the last ten years as a portfolio manager with Bernhardt Capital. While working for Bernhardt, Hatcher was responsible for maintaining and improving the company's code of ethics and guidelines for ethical money management. As a result of Hatcher's efforts, Bernhardt saw a dramatic decline in the number of complaints received from their individual and institutional customers.
One of Bernhardt's direct competitors, Smith Investments, is keenly aware of Hatcher's reputation for ethical business practices and has offered her a job as their compliance officer. Hatcher has been apprised of several potential ethical problems at Smith that she will be directly responsible for fixing through implementation of policies and procedures that will prevent ethical dilemmas. The management at Smith is willing to grant Hatcher the authority to construct and implement policies to eliminate the ethical problems at the company.

Hatcher agrees to accept the position with Smith and resigns from employment with Bernhardt. As her first initiative with the company, Hatcher distributes to all employees at Smith a survey intended to acquaint her with the company's common business practices. Her goal is to identify those factors that are most likely to interfere with Smith's compliance with the CFA Institute's Code of Ethics and Standards of Practice. After collecting and analyzing the anonymous responses to the survey, Hatcher has identified the following four issues as the most frequently cited questionable business practices:
1. Many Smith employees have relatives who are clients of the firm. For relatives* accounts where the Smith employee does not have beneficial ownership, trades are generally executed in conjunction with trades for other discretionary accounts held at the firm. Only in accounts where the Smith employee has beneficial ownership are trades delayed until all discretionary account trading is completed.
2. Many of Smith's employees either personally own or maintain, through a family member, beneficial ownership of stocks that are also held in accounts for many of the firm's clients. While the company maintains a strict disclosure policy to the firm of such beneficial ownership and an "at will" disclosure policy to its clients, employees are not barred from trading these securities for their personal benefit even if their clients also own or have a direct or indirect financial interest in the same securities.
3. Account managers meet weekly to discuss the issues and concerns of the client portfolios managed at the firm. During the meetings it is not unusual for individual clients to be identified and discussed. Information regarding the client's holdings and investment strategy is discussed as well as persona! needs related to the client's portfolio. The meetings are held in order to provide guidance and continuing education to all of the firm's account managers.
4. At the suggestion of fixed-income analysts at the firm, most of the portfolio managers working for Smith have been adding B-rated corporate fixed-income securities to their portfolios. Analysts originally made (and continue to make) the suggestion due to the attractive yield potential offered by this class of investments. Smith's portfolio managers were thrilled with the idea since the returns on many of the portfolios' equity positions have been stifled by high profile accounting scandals.
Management at Smith Investments has been pleased with Hatcher's efforts so far but is concerned about the firm's ability to maintain compliance with the CFA Institute's Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS®). The managing director of the firm, Erich Prince, has made the following comments to Hatcher:
"I am concerned that we will not be able to claim compliance with GIPS at the end of the year since our new information system has inhibited our ability to include terminated portfolios in the historical record up to the last full measurement period before they were terminated. Also, we are unable to regroup portfolios that utilize hedging into separate composites from those that do not utilize hedging. These portfolios are currently grouped according to traditional value and growth strategies based on the capitalization of portfolio holdings (i.e., large vs. small)."
Hatcher eases Prince's mind by telling him she will "ensure full compliance with GIPS by the end of the quarter."

Evaluate Martin Prince's comments about Smith's ability to maintain compliance with the Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS). Are Prince's statements regarding terminated portfolios and hedging strategies correct or incorrect?

  1. Only Prince's statement on terminated portfolios is correct.
  2. Only Prince's statement regarding hedging strategies is correct.
  3. Both of Prince's statements are correct and in full compliance with GIPS.

Answer(s): A

Explanation:

GIPS Standard 3.A.4 requires terminated portfolios to be included in the appropriate composite up until the last full measurement period before the portfolio was terminated. The fact that Smith's new information system will inhibit the ability to account for terminated portfolios means they will be unable to fully comply with GIPS. Remember, there is no partial compliance. A firm either does or does not comply with GIPS. Separating portfolios into composites that utilize and do not utilize hedging is a recommendation of GIPS and not a requirement. Therefore a firm can fail to separate portfolios on the basis of hedging strategies and still maintain compliance with GIPS. GIPS requires separating portfolios into composites based on investment strategy, which Smith has done (i.e., value vs. growth and large cap vs. small cap). (Study Session 1, LOS2.a)



  PDF
Viewing page 36 of 74
Viewing questions 176 - 180 out of 472 questions


Post your Comments and Discuss CFA CFA-Level-III exam prep with other Community members:

AI Tutor AI Tutor 👋 I’m here to help!