統一綜合證券股份有限公司

Circle circle small circle circle come drink tea

A doctor named Calvin noticed that, during a large charity concert, the organizer had issued a structured warrant based on an asset called “sports coins.” The doctor normally studied financial engineering. During a break in the concert, he sat in the audience and used a notebook and ballpoint pen to derive the warrant’s theoretical value and hedging parameters, planning to donate a fixed proportion of the future warrant proceeds to a rural medical fund.

The warrant’s core design is as follows:

The warrant is a European call warrant with no dividends.

Warrant expiration date: T = 1 year

Current price of the underlying asset (sports coins): S0 = 120

Strike price: K = 110

Risk-free interest rate (continuously compounded): r = 3%

Annualized volatility: σ = 25%

Warrant conversion ratio: α = 0.2

In addition, the warrant has a “donation clause”:

If the warrant is in the money at expiration, the warrant holder must immediately donate 10% of the warrant’s intrinsic value at expiration. However, the donation amount does not affect the underlying asset price or market dynamics, and a credit card may be used.

The doctor assumes that this donation clause can be treated as a linear reduction in the expiration cash flow, and therefore expresses the warrant’s expiration payoff as:

Payoff = 0.9 × α × max(ST − K, 0)

Under the risk-neutral probability measure, the doctor writes the following pricing equation:

C = 0.9 × α [ S0 N(d1) − K e^(−rT) N(d2) ]

where

d1 = [ ln(S0 / K) + ( r + 0.5 σ^2 ) T ] / ( σ √T )

d2 = d1 − σ √T

After completing the valuation, the doctor further calculates in his notebook the warrant’s first-order sensitivity to the price of sports coins (Delta), and considers how to dynamically hedge it so that market volatility after the concert ends will not affect the final amount he can donate.

Which of the following options is closest to “the combination of the warrant’s theoretical price and Delta”?

A. Warrant price approximately 1.85, Delta approximately 0.09

B. Warrant price approximately 2.40, Delta approximately 0.12

C. Warrant price approximately 3.10, Delta approximately 0.18

D. Warrant price approximately 3.95, Delta approximately 0.22

1. Convenient transportation

2. Video interviews available

3. Good physical office environment

4. No uniforms

1. During the interview, I was asked questions about the relationship between subordinates and supervisors, such as:

1.1 What kind of management style or type of supervisor do you like/dislike working with?

1.2 What would you do if your supervisor asked you to do something wrong?

1.3 How would you react if your supervisor loudly reprimanded you in front of everyone?

Personally, I don't think 1.2 and 1.3 are very suitable as interview questions. Instead, they made me feel that something very negative had happened in this company or department... I asked friends for their opinions about these kinds of questions. At first, they also thought it was probably just an assessment, but after hearing my thoughts, they agreed that this possibility could not be ruled out.

2. During the first phone call, the department supervisor told me that my qualifications met the company's requirements, but used the phrase "priority approval" to cut the salary to (B), which was lower than the salary (A) posted on the job website. When I asked why the offer was being submitted for approval at B, the person cited the personal circumstances I mentioned during the interview and the costs the company would still need to invest (training costs)... They also mentioned that I had expressed my willingness during the interview to have my salary determined according to company policy, and emphasized that the company's benefits were very good—better than those at my previous company. In the end, although I verbally agreed, it did not reflect my true feelings, because no matter what, the minimum should have been A, right? Isn't that false advertising in the recruitment posting...

The second call was also from the department supervisor, who wanted to finalize my start date. I took the opportunity to ask whether my salary would be adjusted to A after the probationary period. The person said it would not, but that it would be adjusted annually based on performance reviews and other factors, while again emphasizing that the company's benefits were very good—better than those at my previous company (they only dared compare themselves with this low-paying company XD). Some of the details were unclear; the rest of what they said about the benefits was the same as what was written on the job website.

When I received the electronic offer, I discovered that the salary structure included a perfect-attendance allowance... I was completely stunned—how had this not been mentioned at all during the first two phone calls or the interview? I immediately called HR to ask. They said that if I took sick leave or personal leave during the month, I would lose the perfect-attendance allowance unless I used my annual leave. On my first day, another HR representative explained that as long as I did not exceed the company's monthly limit for the number of late arrivals or the cumulative number of minutes late, I could still keep the allowance. Basically, the company will avoid paying it whenever possible.

3. The office was on the thirteenth floor and was later scheduled to move to the third floor. On my second day, I found the office environment extremely dull and unusually quiet. There was very little interaction between colleagues, and I also noticed some phenomena that are difficult to describe. I quickly decided that this was not an environment where I wanted to stay (also because of point 2). Therefore, on the morning of my third day, I resigned, citing an offer from another company. The department supervisor pressed me in detail about the new company's name, department, and salary, but I chose not to say anything. After that, I was interviewed by the department's highest-ranking supervisor, who asked in just as much detail. I still firmly refused to disclose anything. Unexpectedly, she said, "If the pay at the new company isn't much different from what you're getting now, I can make up the difference for you." At the time, I felt this was just a tactic to find out the name of the new company I was joining and how high the pay was. Besides, it seemed unlikely that they would submit the offer for approval again. Personally, I found it rather embarrassing—if they were willing to do that, why not do it from the beginning? Afterwards, I prepared screenshots and reported point 2 to the job website. If there are any subsequent developments, I may add them below. As it turns out, the position has remained closed from the time I resigned until now. What a ridiculous company. It is also possible that they went back and found one of the candidates they had interviewed earlier. Good luck~

4. If you want to apply to this company, try to state a higher expected salary. Asking for 45K–55K, or even more, would not be excessive, because the company will cut it by quite a lot. Since you know they will cut it substantially, why not ask for more in the first place? XD

.............

The interviewer had a terrible attitude and was extremely condescending!!

I don't want to join this kind of company at all @@

The company is shockingly dirty and messy.

The interviewers, one man and one woman, just sat there staring blankly at you without asking any questions. When you answered, they would argue back and sarcastically criticize what you said, showing absolutely no respect for the interviewee’s freedom of expression. Their attitudes were terrible, especially the male interviewer. Although the job posting only required one certification, during the interview they asked why I didn’t have other certifications as well—what was their problem?! If you want to be bombarded with sarcastic remarks during an interview, go ahead and submit your résumé… This is a securities company where even the managers are extremely self-important.