CFA Institute CFA-Level-II Exam - Topic 1 Question 118 Discussion

Jerry Sanders, CFA, has been asked to analyze the 20-year bonds of Marietta Tech, Inc., which are currently being held in a corporate bond portfolio managed by a colleague, and to recommend whether the bonds should be sold or held. The bonds currently have a yield spread of 1.55% over Treasuries.

Marietta Tech, Inc. designs, manufactures, and markets specialty trucks and truck bodies mounted on new truck chassis produced by others, including concrete mixers, refuse bodies, fire and emergency vehicles, defense trucks, cut-away and dry freight van bodies, refrigerated units, stake bodies, and other specialized trucks. Marietta also manufactures fiberglass wind deflectors, armored trucks, shuttle buses, and cargo vans. Marietta's customers are located in the United States and Canada.

Exhibit 1: Selected Financial Data for Marietta Tech, Inc. (in thousands of $)

At lunch Sanders discusses the credit analysis of various types of bonds with Elizabeth Yan, who was just hired as a bond analyst. Yan makes the following statements:

Statement 1: An analysis of the issuer's business and operating risks is important to the analysis of corporate bond credit risk but not important for the credit analysis of asset backed securities (ABS).

Statement 2: The unique bond covenants in a municipal bond's trust indenture require an additional level of credit analysis not necessary in a corporate credit analysis.

After lunch Sanders asks Tatiana Petrovich in the municipal bond department for her opinion on the most important factors in the risk assessment of tax-backed municipal debt. Petrovich identifies three factors:

1. Ameasure of debt burden, such as debt-per-capita in the tax jurisdiction.

2. An evaluation of tax collection rates and intergovernmental revenue ability.

3. Analysis of the municipality's budgetary policies as an indication of financial discipline.

Sanders first analyzes Marietta's 2008 EBIT-to-interest expense and EBITDA-to-interest expense and compares them to the median ratios from Exhibit 2. Relative to the BBB medians for the respective ratios: