Explanation
All product pricing should reflect the cost of maintaining the liquidity required to support a product. This is regardless of the accounting treatment for the product, ie irrespective of whether the product is on or off balance sheet. Therefore statement I is incorrect.
The time horizon to consider for liquidity risk management is determined taking into account a number of factors, which include both the speed at which new sources of liquidity can be generated and any applicable regulatory requirements. Statement II is correct.
Managing collateral, both collateral received and collateral posted with counterparties, is an important aspect of liquidity risk management as liquidity problems often manifest themselves in the form of margin calls requiring collateral to be posted. Statement III is therefore correct.
The maturity period of the different sources of capital funding for a bank, for example equity capital, preferred shares, long term debt etc quite clearly has a significant impact on liquidity needs. Stable sources of funds such as equity or preferred capital, or debt that is not maturing shortly help the liquidity position. Statement IV is therefore correct.
Choice 'b' is the correct answer.

Explanation
If VaR is calculated based upon historical simulations, and these simulations are designed as to include all stress scenarios of interest, then VaR and stress tests can be a part of an integrated risk measurement system.
Therefore it is not correct to say that stress tests are always separately modeled from VaR and II is false. I and III are true, and therefore Choice 'd' is the correct answer.

Explanation
With the passage of time, the range of possible values the FX contract can take increases. Therefore the maximum value of the contract, which is when the credit risk would be maximum, would be at maturity. (Note that this is different than an interest rate swap whose value at maturity approaches zero.) Therefore Choice 'a' is the correct answer and the others are incorrect.

Explanation
While conceptually VaR is a fairly straightforward concept, a number of decisions need to be made to select between the different choices available for the exact mechanism to be used for the calculations.
The Basel framework requires banks to estimate VaR at the 99% confidence level over a 10 day horizon. Yet this is a decision that needs to be explicitly made and documented. Therefore 'I' is a correct choice.
At various stages of the calculations, portfolio values need to be determined. The valuation can be done using a 'full valuation', where each position is explicitly valued; or the portfolio(s) can be reduced to a handful of risk factors, and risk sensitivities such as delta, gamma, convexity etc be used to value the portfolio. The decision between the two approaches is generally based on computational efficiency, complexity of the portfolio, and the degree of exactness desired. 'II' therefore is one of the decisions that needs to be made.
The decision as to disclosing the VaR in financial filings comes after the VaR has been calculated, and is unrelated to the VaR calculation system a bank needs to set up. 'III' is therefore not a correct answer.
Though the Basel framework requires a 10-day VaR to be calculated, it also allows the calculation of the 1-day VaR and and scaling it to 10 days using the square root of time rule. The bank needs to decide whether it wishes to scale the VaR based on a 1-day VaR number, or compute VaR for a 10 day period to begin with. 'IV' therefore is a decision to be made for setting up the VaR system.

Explanation
The probabilities of default of the two bonds are independent (as indicated by a zero default correlation). The various possible states of the portfolio are as follows:
First bond defaults, and the second does not: Probability * Loss = 0.03*0.92 * $50m = $1.38m Second bond defaults, and the first does not: Probability * Loss = 0.97*0.08 * $50m = $3.88m Both bonds default: Probability * Loss = 0.03*0.08 * $100m = $0.24m Thus total expected loss on this portfolio = $5.5m. Since recovery rates are not provided, those should be assumed to be zero.
There is an easier way to solve this as well: default correlation does not affect expected losses, but their volatility. You can calculate the expected losses of the two bonds and add them up, ie, $50m*0.03 + $50m
*0.08 = $5.5m