ChFC®: HS 328 Investments

Try 10 focused ChFC® questions on HS 328 Investments, with answers and explanations, then continue with Securities Prep.

On this page

Open the matching Securities Prep practice page for timed mocks, topic drills, progress tracking, explanations, and full practice.

Topic snapshot

FieldDetail
Exam routeChFC®
IssuerThe American College
Topic areaHS 328 Investments
Blueprint weight14%
Page purposeFocused sample questions before returning to mixed practice

How to use this topic drill

Use this page to isolate HS 328 Investments for ChFC®. Work through the 10 questions first, then review the explanations and return to mixed practice in Securities Prep.

PassWhat to doWhat to record
First attemptAnswer without checking the explanation first.The fact, rule, calculation, or judgment point that controlled your answer.
ReviewRead the explanation even when you were correct.Why the best answer is stronger than the closest distractor.
RepairRepeat only missed or uncertain items after a short break.The pattern behind misses, not the answer letter.
TransferReturn to mixed practice once the topic feels stable.Whether the same skill holds up when the topic is no longer obvious.

Blueprint context: 14% of the practice outline. A focused topic score can overstate readiness if you recognize the pattern too quickly, so use it as repair work before timed mixed sets.

Sample questions

These questions are original Securities Prep practice items aligned to this topic area. They are designed for self-assessment and are not official exam questions.

Question 1

Topic: HS 328 Investments

During discovery and preliminary analysis, Priya’s portfolio is 68% in a total U.S. stock index fund and 32% in her former employer’s biotech stock with a large unrealized gain. She wants less risk but proposes buying several other biotech stocks instead of trimming the employer shares. After confirming her time horizon, liquidity needs, and tax sensitivity, what is the advisor’s best next step?

  • A. Wait to recommend changes until market volatility declines, because systematic risk is the main issue right now.
  • B. Reduce the index fund first, because broad market exposure is the primary source of avoidable risk.
  • C. Analyze the concentrated holding, document its unsystematic risk, and recommend broader diversification while keeping her target equity exposure.
  • D. Add several biotech stocks first, then reassess whether the portfolio still has too much company-specific risk.

Best answer: C

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: Priya’s main problem is concentration in one employer stock, which creates unsystematic risk. After confirming constraints, the advisor should analyze and document that concentration and recommend diversification across broader asset classes rather than moving straight to trades or confusing market risk with avoidable issuer risk.

Systematic risk is marketwide risk that remains even in a well-diversified equity portfolio. Unsystematic risk is company- or sector-specific risk that can be reduced through diversification. Here, the total U.S. stock index fund already provides broad market exposure, while the 32% employer biotech position creates a concentrated, avoidable risk. Buying several other biotech stocks would still leave heavy exposure to the same sector forces.

In the planning process, once the advisor has confirmed goals and constraints, the next step is to analyze and document the concentration issue and then present a recommendation. A sound recommendation would typically diversify away from the single-stock position in a tax-aware manner while preserving the client’s intended overall equity allocation.

The key distinction is that diversification addresses unsystematic risk, not the market’s systematic risk.

  • Same-sector spread is premature and incomplete because adding more biotech stocks may dilute one issuer but still leaves substantial sector-specific exposure.
  • Wait for volatility misidentifies the issue, since market swings reflect systematic risk and do not justify delaying a response to concentration risk.
  • Cut the index fund targets the diversified core holding even though the avoidable risk comes from the oversized employer-stock position.

The employer-stock concentration is avoidable company-specific risk, so the next step is to document that risk and recommend diversification before implementation.


Question 2

Topic: HS 328 Investments

At a portfolio review, Priya wants to replace her diversified mutual fund with a private real estate fund because the offering summary shows a 10.2% investor return while her mutual fund fact sheet shows a 9.4% 1-year total return. Priya would hold either investment in a taxable account, and the private fund summary does not say whether the 10.2% figure includes cash distributions, is net of fees, reflects taxes, or depends on investor cash-flow timing. Which advisor response best aligns with sound performance analysis?

  • A. Adjust only the mutual fund return for taxes, then compare it to 10.2%.
  • B. Move directly to a risk-tolerance review because performance-calculation details are secondary.
  • C. Prefer the private fund because its published return is higher over about one year.
  • D. Request a same-basis comparison covering distributions, net fees, taxes, and timing assumptions.

Best answer: D

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: The best response is to make the reported returns comparable before using them in a recommendation. Here, the private fund’s headline figure is incomplete because key assumptions about income, fees, taxes, and cash-flow timing are missing.

Performance figures are useful only when they are measured on the same basis. In this scenario, the mutual fund shows a 1-year total return, while the private fund’s investor return may or may not include distributions, may be gross rather than net of fees, may be pre-tax rather than after-tax, and may reflect investor cash-flow timing rather than a standard time-weighted result. In a taxable account, taxes can materially change the ranking, and fee treatment can as well. A prudent advisor should first obtain enough detail to restate both figures on a comparable basis, typically same period, total return, net of fees, and with an after-tax lens when relevant. A higher published number is not meaningful if the underlying assumptions differ.

  • Higher headline return fails because similar time labels do not make two returns comparable when income, fees, taxes, or timing treatment may differ.
  • Taxes only fails because adjusting just one figure for taxes still leaves unanswered whether the private fund return is gross or net and whether distributions are included.
  • Risk review first fails because suitability matters, but performance-calculation details are not secondary when the return claim itself may be incomplete.

A return figure is incomplete for comparison until both investments are measured on a comparable basis for income, fees, taxes, and timing.


Question 3

Topic: HS 328 Investments

A retired client reviews a taxable portfolio managed by an outside manager. During the year, she added $300,000 in March and withdrew $200,000 in September for a home purchase. She asks her advisor, “Did the manager do a good job, apart from the timing of my deposits and withdrawals?” Which return measure should the advisor use?

  • A. Arithmetic average return
  • B. Time-weighted return
  • C. Money-weighted return
  • D. Geometric average return

Best answer: B

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: Time-weighted return is the best choice when the question is manager evaluation rather than the client’s personal experience. It removes the distortion caused by client-directed deposits and withdrawals, so it better reflects the manager’s actual investment decisions.

The key distinction is whether the planner is evaluating the portfolio manager or the client’s own dollars. Time-weighted return is designed for manager evaluation because it breaks performance into subperiods around external cash flows and links those subperiod returns together. That removes the impact of the client’s deposit in March and withdrawal in September, which were not controlled by the manager.

Money-weighted return, by contrast, reflects the timing and size of those cash flows, so it is better for asking how the client personally fared. Arithmetic and geometric averages can summarize returns, but neither is the preferred measure when the planning question is specifically about manager skill in the presence of external cash flows. When client cash-flow timing should not affect the judgment, use time-weighted return.

  • Money-weighted focus fits the client’s personal investment experience because it incorporates the size and timing of deposits and withdrawals.
  • Arithmetic average is only a simple average of periodic returns and does not handle compounding or cash-flow distortion well.
  • Geometric average captures compounded growth over time, but it still is not the standard measure for isolating manager performance from external cash flows.

Time-weighted return isolates the manager’s investment performance by neutralizing the effect of external cash flows.


Question 4

Topic: HS 328 Investments

Leah’s advisor follows her written investment policy statement for a retirement IRA.

Exhibit: Portfolio summary

ItemDetail
Risk profileModerate
Strategic target60% stock / 40% bond
Rebalancing ruleRebalance if either asset class moves more than 5 percentage points from target
Current allocation69% stock / 31% bond
Account typeTraditional IRA
Client instructionUse a disciplined process, not market forecasts

Based on the exhibit, which planning action is best supported?

  • A. Delay rebalancing until a pullback confirms stocks have peaked.
  • B. Rebalance now toward 60/40 by shifting some stocks to bonds.
  • C. Wait until the next review because the portfolio is still within bands.
  • D. Increase the long-term stock target because recent gains show higher capacity.

Best answer: B

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: Disciplined rebalancing is used to restore a client’s strategic allocation when market movement pushes the portfolio outside preset limits. Here, the stock allocation is above the allowed range, so trimming stocks and adding bonds supports risk control rather than market timing.

The core concept is policy-based rebalancing. Leah’s target is 60% stock and 40% bond, with a 5-percentage-point band, so the acceptable stock range is 55% to 65%. Her current 69% stock allocation is outside that range, meaning the portfolio now carries more equity risk than intended for a moderate profile. Because the assets are in a traditional IRA, current capital gains tax is not a barrier to making the adjustment. A disciplined rebalance sells part of the overweight asset class and adds to the underweight asset class to move back toward the strategic mix. That is risk control, because the action follows a preset rule and client instruction, not a prediction about short-term market direction. The closest error is treating recent performance as a reason to change the target allocation itself.

  • Within bands fails because 69% stock is above the 65% upper limit.
  • Raise the target fails because strategic allocation should reflect goals and risk tolerance, not recent returns.
  • Wait for a pullback fails because it turns a rules-based rebalance into a tactical market call.

The IPS band has been breached, so moving some stock exposure to bonds restores the intended risk level without making a market forecast.


Question 5

Topic: HS 328 Investments

A planner is reviewing two brokerage sleeves for a client. No contributions or withdrawals occurred during the year.

  • Growth sleeve: began at $50,000, ended at $53,500, and paid $1,000 of cash distributions.
  • Income sleeve: began at $80,000, ended at $84,000, and paid $2,400 of cash distributions.

Using a simple return comparison, which statement is most accurate?

  • A. Income sleeve had both the higher percentage return and larger dollar gain.
  • B. Growth sleeve had both the higher percentage return and larger dollar gain.
  • C. Growth sleeve had the higher percentage return; income sleeve had the larger dollar gain.
  • D. Income sleeve had the higher percentage return; growth sleeve had the larger dollar gain.

Best answer: C

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: Simple total return compares the gain relative to the starting amount, not just the raw dollars earned. Here, the growth sleeve returned 9% and the income sleeve returned 8%, although the income sleeve produced more dollars because it started larger.

Use simple total return, which includes both price change and cash distributions, then compare that return to beginning value. For the growth sleeve, the dollar return is $53,500 - $50,000 + $1,000 = $4,500, and $4,500 / $50,000 = 9%. For the income sleeve, the dollar return is $84,000 - $80,000 + $2,400 = $6,400, and $6,400 / $80,000 = 8%. The growth sleeve therefore had the better percentage performance, even though the income sleeve generated more dollars because it started with more capital. The key is to separate dollar return from percentage return when account sizes differ.

  • The option favoring the income sleeve on percentage return mistakes a larger dollar gain for a higher rate of return.
  • The option saying the income sleeve led on both measures ignores that its 8% return trails the growth sleeve’s 9%.
  • The option saying the growth sleeve led on both measures ignores that the income sleeve produced the larger dollar gain, $6,400 versus $4,500.

Growth sleeve returned 9% versus 8% for income, but income earned more dollars because it started with a larger balance.


Question 6

Topic: HS 328 Investments

Marcus is in a high federal tax bracket and is building a taxable brokerage account around separate retirement assets. He wants his U.S. large-cap allocation to serve as a low-cost core holding, but he and his advisor also want the flexibility to trade during the day when harvesting losses or trimming company stock after vesting. Marcus would like to reduce the chance of surprise year-end capital gain distributions. Which pooled vehicle best fits these needs?

  • A. A tax-managed large-cap index mutual fund
  • B. A broad-market equity ETF
  • C. A target-date retirement mutual fund
  • D. A leveraged closed-end dividend fund

Best answer: B

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: A broad-market equity ETF is the best fit for a taxable core equity position when the client values both after-tax efficiency and intraday trading flexibility. ETFs generally offer lower realized capital gain distributions than many mutual funds and can be traded throughout the day.

The key principle is to match the pooled vehicle’s structure to the client’s account type, tax sensitivity, trading needs, and intended portfolio role. Here, the client wants a taxable-account core U.S. large-cap holding, not an income specialty sleeve or an all-in-one allocation fund. A broad-market ETF is typically well suited because it combines low turnover, broad diversification, and intraday tradability. It is also generally more tax efficient than many open-end mutual funds because ETF creation and redemption mechanics can reduce taxable capital gain distributions to shareholders.

A tax-managed index mutual fund is a reasonable taxable-account vehicle, but it still trades only once daily at NAV, so it falls short on the stated need for intraday execution. The best match is therefore the ETF structure for this specific combination of goals.

  • Tax-managed mutual fund helps with taxes, but open-end mutual funds execute only at end-of-day NAV and do not meet the stated intraday trading need.
  • Closed-end dividend fund can add leverage, premium/discount risk, and an income emphasis that does not fit a plain large-cap core allocation.
  • Target-date fund is designed as a bundled multi-asset solution, not as a precise taxable-account large-cap sleeve with flexible trading control.

A broad-market ETF best combines a tax-efficient taxable-account structure with intraday liquidity for a core equity allocation.


Question 7

Topic: HS 328 Investments

Asha and Ben, both 37, are starting a household investment plan with $25,000 and $500 monthly contributions in their IRAs. They want broad diversification, minimal maintenance, and enough liquidity to change course if their goals change. They also admit they tend to abandon plans that require frequent trades. Which implementation step best fits their needs?

  • A. Split contributions between a sector ETF and a REIT fund.
  • B. Build the account with eight individual dividend stocks.
  • C. Direct contributions to a low-cost target-allocation mutual fund.
  • D. Purchase a thinly traded closed-end fund at a discount.

Best answer: C

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: A low-cost target-allocation mutual fund best matches a household that wants simplicity, diversification, and a plan they are likely to maintain. It provides a professionally managed mix of assets with built-in rebalancing and daily liquidity, reducing both concentration risk and behavioral friction.

When a household’s main constraint is implementation, the best investment company choice is often the one that reduces complexity without giving up diversification or liquidity. Here, a target-allocation mutual fund lets Asha and Ben make recurring contributions into one pooled vehicle that already holds many securities across asset classes. The fund handles rebalancing internally, so they do not need to monitor and trade multiple positions themselves. That supports better plan adherence, which is especially important because they admit they are likely to quit if the process feels too demanding.

  • Immediate diversification across many holdings
  • Simple recurring contributions into one fund
  • Daily liquidity if goals or risk tolerance change

The closest distractor uses pooled vehicles, but concentrated sector and real estate exposure still leaves the household doing too much portfolio construction work.

  • Individual stocks fail because eight names still leave meaningful concentration risk and require ongoing security selection and rebalancing.
  • Closed-end fund discount is not the priority here; thin trading can make implementation and liquidity less reliable for a simple household plan.
  • Sector and REIT funds use investment companies, but they create a narrow allocation rather than a broadly diversified core portfolio.

A target-allocation mutual fund combines broad diversification, built-in rebalancing, and daily liquidity in a simple structure that supports consistent follow-through.


Question 8

Topic: HS 328 Investments

Maria, 62, plans to retire in 18 months. She expects to draw about $60,000 per year from her portfolio for the first 7 years of retirement while delaying Social Security to age 70. Most of her taxable account is in broad U.S. equity funds, and she says a major loss just before retirement would cause her to cut spending. Current conditions: broad U.S. equities trade at about 24 times forward earnings versus a long-term average near 18; high-dividend stocks also trade at premium valuations; 1- to 5-year Treasuries yield about 4.3% to 4.6%; 1- to 5-year TIPS offer positive real yields; long-term bonds remain highly rate-sensitive. Which portfolio action best aligns with durable planning principles?

  • A. Keep the reserve in equities because retirement is long term.
  • B. Build a 5- to 7-year reserve with high-quality bonds and TIPS.
  • C. Use high-dividend stocks for the near-term spending reserve.
  • D. Lock the reserve into long-duration bonds for added income.

Best answer: B

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: The strongest recommendation matches Maria’s early-retirement cash-flow need with assets that are less exposed to equity drawdowns and excessive duration risk. Positive real TIPS yields and solid short-to-intermediate bond yields make a dedicated spending reserve more attractive than depending on richly valued stocks.

The key concept is matching the asset to the liability. Maria has a known, near-term withdrawal need and a low tolerance for a large loss just before retirement, so her first several years of spending should not depend mainly on equity market performance. Elevated stock valuations suggest lower future return potential and less margin of safety, while premium-priced dividend stocks do not become bond substitutes just because they pay income.

A ladder or reserve using high-quality short-to-intermediate bonds and TIPS fits the facts because it:

  • funds near-term withdrawals with more predictable principal behavior,
  • reduces sequence-of-returns risk early in retirement,
  • provides inflation protection through TIPS, and
  • avoids taking unnecessary long-duration interest-rate risk.

The better interpretation is not that stocks are uninvestable, but that near-term spending assets should be separated from long-horizon growth assets.

  • Dividend trap fails because stock dividends do not remove equity valuation risk or market-drawdown risk for near-term spending.
  • Too much duration fails because long-term bonds can be volatile when rates move, which is a poor fit for spending needs within a few years.
  • Horizon mismatch fails because a long retirement horizon does not justify leaving the first several years of withdrawals exposed to equity losses.

This best matches near-term spending needs with more stable assets while reducing sequence risk and avoiding reliance on richly valued equities or long-duration bonds.


Question 9

Topic: HS 328 Investments

An advisor is reviewing Maya Chen’s taxable bond sleeve. Maya asks which holding is most exposed to a rise in market interest rates, assuming credit spreads do not change.

Exhibit: Portfolio summary

SecurityMaturityCouponCredit quality
Treasury STRIPS20400.0%U.S. Treasury
Treasury note20404.0%U.S. Treasury
Corporate bond20306.1%A
Corporate bond20307.4%B

Which interpretation is fully supported by the exhibit?

  • A. The 2040 Treasury STRIPS should have the greatest price sensitivity to interest-rate changes.
  • B. The 2030 A-rated corporate bond should be more rate-sensitive than both 2040 Treasuries because corporates have credit risk.
  • C. The 2040 Treasury note should be more rate-sensitive than the 2040 STRIPS because it pays periodic coupons.
  • D. The 2030 B-rated corporate bond should have the least credit sensitivity because its coupon is highest.

Best answer: A

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: Interest-rate exposure generally rises with longer maturity and lower coupon. The 2040 Treasury STRIPS combines the longest maturity shown with a zero-coupon structure, so it would typically experience the largest price change when market rates move.

To compare fixed income interest-rate exposure, first focus on maturity and coupon structure, then separate that from credit sensitivity. Longer maturities usually have higher duration, and zero-coupon bonds have especially high duration because all cash flow arrives at maturity. Here, the 2040 Treasury STRIPS is both long-dated and zero coupon, so it should have the greatest price sensitivity to a rate increase. The 2040 Treasury note has the same maturity, but its interim coupon payments reduce duration. The 2030 corporate bonds mature sooner, so they generally have less rate sensitivity, even though their credit quality differs.

  • Longer maturity usually means more interest-rate exposure.
  • Lower coupon, especially zero coupon, usually means higher duration.
  • Lower credit quality increases credit-spread sensitivity, not automatic rate sensitivity.

The closest trap is the 2040 Treasury note, which shares the maturity date but not the zero-coupon structure.

  • Higher coupon confusion reverses the credit point; the B-rated corporate has more credit sensitivity, not less, despite its higher coupon.
  • Coupon effect reversed misses that periodic coupons shorten duration relative to a STRIPS with the same maturity.
  • Credit risk leap infers that corporate status alone makes the 2030 A bond more rate-sensitive than longer Treasuries, which the exhibit does not support.

Its zero-coupon structure and long maturity give it the highest duration among the four holdings.


Question 10

Topic: HS 328 Investments

After completing discovery, a planner determines that 60% of a client’s investable assets are in one technology stock. The client says, “Just tell me which single stock is safer so I can lower risk,” and there are no immediate tax or liquidity constraints. What is the planner’s best next step?

  • A. Sell part of the stock now and explain diversification after execution.
  • B. Postpone changes until the next annual review to gather more return data.
  • C. Show a diversified allocation analysis emphasizing correlation and portfolio-level risk.
  • D. Recommend a lower-beta stock to replace the technology position.

Best answer: C

What this tests: HS 328 Investments

Explanation: Under modern portfolio theory, diversification changes risk mainly through the relationship among holdings, not by finding one supposedly safer security. After discovery identifies a concentration problem, the appropriate next step is portfolio-level analysis and client education before making trades.

Modern portfolio theory focuses on total portfolio risk, not just the risk of one holding. A portfolio becomes less risky when assets do not move in perfect lockstep, because less-than-perfect correlation helps reduce unsystematic, concentration-related risk. Here, the planner has already completed discovery and uncovered a clear concentration issue. The correct workflow is to move into analysis and recommendation by showing how a diversified allocation could change the client’s overall risk profile, then discuss implementation.

A single-stock substitution is a weaker response because it keeps the client concentrated in one security. Executing trades before that analysis skips an important planning safeguard, and delaying the discussion is unnecessary because the issue is already identified. The key takeaway is that better portfolio construction usually changes risk more meaningfully than picking a different individual stock.

  • Single-stock fix fails because replacing one stock with another still leaves the client exposed to concentration risk.
  • Trade first fails because implementation should follow analysis and recommendation, not come before them.
  • Delay review fails because the planner already has enough information to address the identified risk issue now.

MPT evaluates risk at the portfolio level, so the next step is to analyze and explain how less-than-perfect correlations reduce concentration risk.

Continue with full practice

Use the ChFC® Practice Test page for the full Securities Prep route, mixed-topic practice, timed mock exams, explanations, and web/mobile app access.

Open the matching Securities Prep practice page for timed mocks, topic drills, progress tracking, explanations, and full practice.

Free review resource

Read the ChFC® guide on SecuritiesMastery.com, then return to Securities Prep for timed practice.

Revised on Thursday, May 14, 2026