Home / INVESTMENT · Module 3: Investment for DB and DC Schemes / Unit 3.2: Investment Strategy, Portfolios and Mandates

APT·INVESTMENT · Module 3: Investment for DB and DC Schemes·UnitINVESTMENT · Unit 02Access: Premium

Unit 3.2: Investment Strategy, Portfolios and Mandates

Unit 3.2 moves from individual assets to strategy. It covers strategic asset allocation and the way a scheme’s liabilities shape it, the specialised investment techniques used in defined benefit schemes such as liability-driven investment and hedging, which the syllabus marks DB only, the structure of investment portfolios across active and passive and pooled and segregated approaches, how investment mandates are set and evaluated, and the types of investment actually undertaken. Keep the DB-only label in view, because a defined contribution trustee is not expected to apply the same techniques.

Questions
221
Topics
5
Access
Premium

What’s in it.

5 topics
  • Topic 01

    Strategic Investment Allocation

    45 questions
  • Topic 02

    The Use of Specialised Investment Techniques (DB only)

    43 questions
  • Topic 03

    The Structure of Investment Portfolios

    43 questions
  • Topic 04

    Investment Mandates: Awareness and Evaluation

    45 questions
  • Topic 05

    The Type of Investments Undertaken

    45 questions

Sample questions

3 of many

A few questions from this unit, with the answer and a full explanation. The complete bank is available when you start practising.

  1. A trustee board wants to know the exact underlying securities held within its allocation at any given time, for its own governance monitoring purposes. Which structural arrangement is best suited to this requirement?

    • A segregated mandate, holding direct title to its own assets
      Correct answer
    • A DC default arrangement built from pooled sub-funds
    • An insurance company life fund open to retail investors
    • A pooled fund, since pooled funds always provide more granular holdings data than segregated mandates
    Explanation

    A segregated mandate gives the scheme direct title to its own underlying assets exclusively, which typically provides trustees with more granular, scheme-specific visibility into exact current holdings than a pooled fund, where the scheme's interest is a unit or policy interest in assets combined with other investors and typically reported at fund level rather than tailored to a single investor. Key takeaway: where granular, scheme-specific holdings transparency is a priority, a segregated mandate is the structure best suited to deliver it.

  2. What might indicate that a manager has breached the guidelines set out in its mandate?

    • The manager has underperformed its peer group while still beating its stated benchmark
    • The manager's portfolio has drifted from the investment style originally specified in the mandate
    • The manager's portfolio turnover has increased compared with the previous year
    • The manager has exceeded a concentration or derivative-use limit in the mandate
      Correct answer
    Explanation

    A mandate breach occurs where a manager exceeds guidelines explicitly set within the mandate, such as concentration or derivative-use limits, rather than where a manager simply underperforms or makes minor administrative changes. Key takeaway: a breach is a failure to operate within the mandate's stated rules, distinct from ordinary underperformance.

  3. A scheme's growth assets fall broadly in value during a market downturn, while its matching assets rise in value as interest rate expectations fall over the same period. As a result, the scheme's actual growth/matching split moves further from its strategic target than either movement would have caused alone. What does this scenario illustrate about the practical effect of market movements on permitted ranges?

    • Combined drift of this kind can only occur in a DC scheme's default arrangement, not in a DB scheme's growth and matching portfolios
    • Market movements affecting different asset classes in different directions can compound into a larger combined drift
      Correct answer
    • The scenario proves the scheme's growth and matching assets are classified incorrectly
    • Only a single asset class can experience market-driven drift at any one time within a diversified portfolio
    Explanation

    Because growth and matching assets can move in different directions for different reasons, here growth assets falling in a downturn while matching assets rise as rate expectations fall, the resulting drift in the growth/matching split can be larger than either individual asset class's movement alone would suggest, potentially pushing the actual weighting outside its permitted range faster than a single-direction market move would; recognising this compounding effect is part of understanding how permitted ranges interact with real market conditions across a DB scheme's growth and matching portfolios. Key takeaway: drift from a permitted range can compound when different asset classes move in offsetting directions relative to each other, not just when one asset class alone moves sharply.