hard · FRM Part 2 Risk & Investment Management
An institutional allocator evaluates a hedge fund reporting a smooth monthly return series with first-order autocorrelation of ρ_1 = 0.4 and a reported annualized Sharpe ratio of 1.6. The fund holds illiquid, infrequently-priced assets. The allocator unsmooths the returns using a Geltner-style AR(1) adjustment.
Compared with the reported figures, what is the MOST accurate description of the effect on the estimated true volatility and the appropriately de-biased annualized Sharpe ratio?
- Unsmoothing raises the estimated volatility and lowers the per-period Sharpe, but the standard √(12) annualization OVERSTATES the annual Sharpe because positive autocorrelation makes multi-period variance grow faster than linearly.
- Unsmoothing leaves volatility unchanged but raises the mean return estimate, so the annualized Sharpe is biased upward and should be revised down only for the autocorrelation in the mean.
- Unsmoothing raises the estimated volatility and lowers the per-period Sharpe, and because positive autocorrelation makes variance grow SLOWER than linearly the √(12) rule understates annual volatility, partially offsetting the correction.
- Unsmoothing lowers the estimated volatility because removing measurement noise reduces variance, so the de-biased annualized Sharpe is actually HIGHER than the 1.6 reported.
Sign up free to see the explanation and track your rank →
More FRM Part 2 Risk & Investment Management practice
- A hedge fund strategy captures frequent small gains but suff… — This risk profile is most
- A risk manager is evaluating an 'Illiquid Asset' (e.g., Priv… — Why is the 'Autocorrelatio
- An active manager has an Information Coefficient (IC) of 0.06 and a breadth (BR) of 400 in
- If the reported volatility is 10% and the first-order autocorrelation (φ) of returns is 0.
- In the context of Liquidity Risk, the 'Denominator Effect' refers to which of the followin
- If the manager effectively doubles the breadth (BR) of the strategy while maintaining the
- According to factor theory, why does an asset that pays off during 'bad times' (such as a
- If a position is removed from a portfolio, the change in total VaR is exactly equal to its