问题 单项选择题

以下叙述不符合利率期限结构理论的市场分割假说的是( )。

A.每一投资者都偏好于收益曲线的特定部分,即专注于某一类或期限在某一范围内的债券

B.各种期限债券的利率由该种债券的供求决定,而不受其他期限债券预期收益率的影响

C.市场分割假说对收益率曲线一般向右上倾斜的原因无法作出理论解释

D.期限结构的市场分割假说将不同期限的债券市场视为完全独立和分割开来的市场

答案

参考答案:C

解析:[分析]
根据市场分割假说,收益率曲线的不同形状为不同期限债券的供求差异所决定。一般来说,如果投资者偏好期限较短,利率风险较小的债券,则市场分割假说可以解释第三个事实,即典型的收益率曲线向上倾斜的原因。因为在一般情况下,对长期债券的需求比对短期债券少,所以长期债券价格较低,利率较高,将来买进长期债券的收益高于短期利率,收益率曲线因此向上倾斜。因此,选项C的叙述不符合利率期限结构理论的市场分割假说。

填空题
填空题

For centuries people have been fighting over whether governments should allow trade between countries. There have been, and probably always will be, (1) to the argument. Some people argue that just (2) is best for both the country and the world. Others argue that trade with other countries (3) for some people to make a good living. Both sides are at least (4) .
International trade matters a lot. Its effects on (5) are enormous. Imagine a world in which your country (6) at all with other countries. Imagine what kind of job you would be (7) and what goods you could buy or not buy in such a world.
For the United States, for example, start by imagining that it lived without its (8) a year in imported oil, and cut back on its (9) because the remaining domestic oil and other energy sources were (10) . Producers and consumers in other parts of the economy would (11) if they were suddenly stripped of foreign-made goods like CD players and clothing. On the (12) side, suppose that Boeing could sell airplanes, and farmers could sell their crops, (13) the United States, and that U. S. universities could admit only (14) . In each case there are people who gain and people who lose from (15) international trade. In any case, less or more international trade will have (16) on your career as well as your life.
For years, American companies are often faced with the choice of buying (17) , which are expensive, and foreign-made goods, which are cheap. If the company buys American goods, it may (18) taxpayers by failing to keep prices low. But if it buys foreign goods, it may (19) the jobs of American workers. Recently, Congress has passed a law compelling American companies with government contracts to (20) domestic goods and services.

For centuries people have been fighting over whether governments should allow trade between countries. There have been, and probably always will be, (1) to the argument. Some people argue that just (2) is best for both the country and the world. Others argue that trade with other countries (3) for some people to make a good living. Both sides are at least (4) .
International trade matters a lot. Its effects on (5) are enormous. Imagine a world in which your country (6) at all with other countries. Imagine what kind of job you would be (7) and what goods you could buy or not buy in such a world.
For the United States, for example, start by imagining that it lived without its (8) a year in imported oil, and cut back on its (9) because the remaining domestic oil and other energy sources were (10) . Producers and consumers in other parts of the economy would (11) if they were suddenly stripped of foreign-made goods like CD players and clothing. On the (12) side, suppose that Boeing could sell airplanes, and farmers could sell their crops, (13) the United States, and that U. S. universities could admit only (14) . In each case there are people who gain and people who lose from (15) international trade. In any case, less or more international trade will have (16) on your career as well as your life.
For years, American companies are often faced with the choice of buying (17) , which are expensive, and foreign-made goods, which are cheap. If the company buys American goods, it may (18) taxpayers by failing to keep prices low. But if it buys foreign goods, it may (19) the jobs of American workers. Recently, Congress has passed a law compelling American companies with government contracts to (20) domestic goods and services.