The Fixed-Rate Bond Bought at the Wrong Time
Fiona is 58, a PAYE employee with a secure job, and has €120,000 in a deposit account earning 0.5%. Her investment horizon to retirement is 7 years. A broker recommends a 10-year Irish government bond with a 2.0% annual coupon bought at par, quoting a yield to maturity of 2.0%. Fiona has no other investable assets, a €15,000 emergency fund already in place, and a mortgage-free home. She tells you she 'cannot afford to lose any of this money' and that she might need €40,000 of it in 3 years to help her daughter with a house deposit. The broker stresses that the bond is 'capital guaranteed if held to maturity'. Interest rates are widely expected to rise over the next 18 months.
1. Assess whether the 10-year bond is suitable for Fiona, identifying at least three distinct mismatches between the product and her circumstances.
Read the worked answer
Horizon mismatch: the bond matures in 10 years but Fiona's stated need for €40,000 arises in 3 years and her overall horizon is 7 years. To fund the €40,000 in year 3 she would have to sell before maturity, at which point the 'capital guarantee' does not apply - she is exposed to market price risk.
Interest-rate (price) risk: if rates rise as expected, the price of a 2.0% coupon bond falls. Rough duration for a 10-year 2% bond is around 9 years, so a 1% rise in yields implies roughly a 9% capital loss on the portion sold early. The guarantee is only a hold-to-maturity guarantee.
Liquidity/access mismatch: all €120,000 would be locked into a single illiquid-ish instrument when she has a known 3-year cash need. The €40,000 should be held in a matching-maturity deposit or short-dated instrument, not a 10-year bond.
Concentration risk: this is her entire investable pot in a single issuer and single maturity. A credit-union or State Savings ladder, or a diversified approach, would spread risk.
Stated risk tolerance conflict: she says she cannot afford to lose any capital, yet the product can show a capital loss if sold early - the recommendation contradicts her own stated constraint.
Conclusion: unsuitable as presented. At most a small slice of the 7-year portion could go into a shorter-dated bond; the 3-year money belongs in a matching deposit.
2. The broker argues the bond is 'capital guaranteed'. Explain precisely what that guarantee does and does not cover, and how you would reframe the risk conversation for Fiona.
Read the worked answer
What it covers: repayment of the €120,000 face value plus coupons, provided the bond is held to the 10-year maturity and the issuer does not default. It is a guarantee against issuer default and against reinvestment/price risk at maturity.
What it does not cover:
- Early-sale price risk: sell in year 3 and you get the market price, which may be below par if yields have risen.
- Inflation risk: a 2.0% coupon against inflation of, say, 3% produces a negative real return every year. The 'guarantee' is nominal, not real.
- Opportunity cost / reinvestment risk: locking 2.0% for 10 years when rates are expected to rise means forgoing higher yields.
- Issuer credit risk: sovereign guarantees are strong but not the same as a deposit guarantee scheme.
Reframing: separate her pot into money she needs and money she can leave. The €40,000 due in 3 years goes into a 3-year fixed deposit or State Savings product with a known maturity value. The remaining €80,000 - for a 7-year horizon - can take some duration risk, but a single 10-year bond is still too long. Ask her to state, in euro terms, the worst one-year paper loss she could tolerate; that number, not the broker's label, should drive the allocation.