This document appears to be a student project on interest rate parity submitted for a university course. It includes a title page with the student's name and details, a declaration signed by the student, an acknowledgements section thanking the professor for guidance, and a table of contents listing the various sections of the project. The sections discuss concepts like covered and uncovered interest rate parity, the assumptions of interest rate parity, and covered interest rate parity specifically. Diagrams and equations are provided to illustrate the concepts.

1. JAI HIND COLLEGE
BASANTSING INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE
&
J.T. LALVANI COLLEGE OF COMMERCE
A PROJECT ON
INTEREST RATE PARITY
IN THE SUBJECT OF
ECONOMICS
SUBMITTED TO
UNIVERSITY OF MUMBAI
For Semester 1 of M.Com Part 1
By
NAME: RUPEN CHALWA
ROLL NO.: 10
MCOM- PART-1

2. DECLERATION
I, Rupen Chawla, student of M.Com Part 1,
Roll no. 10 hereby declare that the project
for the Paper Economics titled Interest Rate
Parity submitted by me for Semester- 2
during the academic year 2014-15, is based
on actual work carried out by me.
I further state that this work is original and
not submitted anywhere else for any
examination.
NAME: RUPEN CHALWA
MCOM- PART-1
ROLL NO.: 10
DATE OF SUBMISSION: , 2014
Acknowledgement

3. I wish to thank Professor Vadehi for his
encouragement and support throughout the
project it is due to his best effort and
continued guidance that I was able to
prepare this project.
Rupen Chawla

4. JAI HIND COLLEGE
‘A’ ROAD, CHURCHGATE, MUMBAI- 400020
CERTIFICATE
This is to certify that Mr. Rupen Chawla of M.Com
Accountancy and Finance Semester 2 (2014-15) has
successfully completed the project Interest Rate Parity
under the guidance of Professor Vadehi.
__________ __________
Course coordinator Principal
__________ ___________
Internal Examiner External Examiner
__________
College Seal

5. INDEX
1. Introduction
2. Assumptions
3. COVERED AND UNCOVERED INTEREST
RATE PARITY
4. COVERED INTEREST RATE PARITY
{CIP}
5. UNCOVERED INTEREST RATE PARITY
{UIP}

6. 1) INRODUCTION
Interest rate parity is a no-arbitrage condition representing
an equilibrium state under which investors will be indifferent
to interest rates available on bank deposits in two countries.[1] The
fact that this condition does not always hold allows for potential
opportunities to earn riskless profits from covered interest
arbitrage. Two assumptions central to interest rate parity are capital
mobility and perfect substitutability of domestic and foreign assets.
Given foreign exchange market equilibrium, the interest rate parity
condition implies that the expected return on domestic assets will
equal the exchange rate-adjusted expected return on foreign
currency assets. Investors then cannot earn arbitrage profits by
borrowing in a country with a lower interest rate, exchanging for
foreign currency, and investing in a foreign country with a higher
interest rate, due to gains or losses from exchanging back to their
domestic currency at maturity.[2] Interest rate parity takes on two
distinctive forms: uncovered interest rate parity refers to the parity
condition in which exposure to foreign exchange risk (unanticipated
changes in exchange rates) is uninhibited, whereas covered interest
rate parity refers to the condition in which a forward contract has
been used to cover (eliminate exposure to) exchange rate risk. Each
form of the parity condition demonstrates a unique relationship with
implications for the forecasting of future exchange rates:
the forward exchange rate and the future spot exchange rate.[1]
Economists have found empirical evidence that covered interest
rate parity generally holds, though not with precision due to the
effects of various risks, costs, taxation, and ultimate differences in
liquidity. When both covered and uncovered interest rate parity
hold, they expose a relationship suggesting that the forward rate is
an unbiased predictor of the future spot rate. This relationship can
be employed to test whether uncovered interest rate parity holds,
for which economists have found mixed results. When uncovered
interest rate parity and purchasing power parity hold together, they
illuminate a relationship named real interest rate parity, which
suggests that expected real interest ratesrepresent expected
adjustments in the real exchange rate. This relationship generally
holds strongly over longer terms and among emerging

7. market countries.
EXAMPLES
For our illustration purpose consider investing € 1000 for 1 year.
We'll consider two investment cases viz:
Case I: Domestic Investment
In the U.S.A., consider the spot exchange rate of $1.2245/€ 1.
So we can exchange our € 1000 @ $1.2245 = $1224.50
Now we can invest $1224.50 @ 3.0% for 1 year which yields
$1261.79 at the end of the year.
Case II: Foreign Investment
Likewise we can invest € 1000 in a foreign European market, say at
the rate of 5.0% for 1 year.
But we buy forward 1 year to lock in the future exchange rate at

8. $1.20025/€ 1 since we need to convert our € 1000 back to the
domestic currency, i.e. the U.S. Dollar.
So € 1000 @ of 5.0% for 1 year = € 1051.27
Then we can convert € 1051.27 @ $1.20025 = $1261.79
Thus, in the absence of arbitrage, the Return on Investment (RoI) is
same regardless of our choice of investment method.
There are two types of IRP.
2) ASSUMPTIONS
Interest rate parity rests on certain assumptions, the first being
that capital is mobile - investors can readily exchange domestic
assets for foreign assets. The second assumption is that assets
have perfect substitutability, following from their similarities
in riskiness and liquidity. Given capital mobility and perfect
substitutability, investors would be expected to hold those assets
offering greater returns, be they domestic or foreign assets.
However, both domestic and foreign assets are held by investors.
Therefore, it must be true that no difference can exist between the
returns on domestic assets and the returns on foreign
assets.[2] That is not to say that domestic investors and foreign
investors will earn equivalent returns, but that a single investor on
any given side would expect to earn equivalent returns from either
investment decision.[3]
3)COVERED AND UNCOVERED INTEREST
RATE PARITY
Key relationships
In international economics, key macroeconomic variables include
the following (symbols are in parentheses; * means a foreign
variable):
Exchange rate (e)
Prices (p, p*)
Interest rates (i, i*)
Current account (CA)
Capital account (KA)
GDP (y, y*)

9. How these variables are related is the central question of open
macroeconomics. In this lecture, interest parities, or the
relationships between the exchange rate (e) and interest rates (i,
i*), are investigated. Please note that the arguments presented
below are valid only among countries whose financial sectors are
sufficiently developed and externally open. If a country is financially
closed or its financial sector lacks depth, liquidity and institutional
development (for example, without well-functioning spot and
forward currency markets), interest parities do not hold.
There are two versions of interest parities: covered and uncovered.
The covered version involves no exchange risks, while the
uncovered version entails such risks and elements of speculation.
Both interest parities (especially the uncovered version) are key
building blocks of many open macroeconomic models.
In the next lecture, purchasing power parity (PPP), namely the
relationship between the exchange rate (e) and prices (p, p*), will
be discussed. That is also a key input to open macroeconomic
modeling. This lecture will also make references to it.
The law of one price (LOOP) and arbitrage
Interest parities (as well as PPP presented in the next lecture) are a
type of the law of one price in an integrated world. The law of one
price says that identical commodities (or anything) bought and sold
in different markets should bear the same price. Otherwise, there
will be a profit opportunity in buying the commodity in one market
and selling it in the other, and someone will surely do it (this
activity of pursuing gain by combined purchase and sale, without
changing the physical characteristics of the commodity, is
called arbitrage). In an integrated and properly functioning market,
arbitrage will surely continue until the law of one price is
established, eliminating any further opportunity for excess profit.
Then the two markets are really one.
Some markets show LOOP, but others do not. Whether they do or
do not depends on (i) the characteristics of the merchandise
(especially the transportation cost; heavy and bulky items are
difficult to arbitrage); (ii) the characteristics of market competition
and strategies of traders; and (iii) policy intervention (e.g., capital
control, tax and tariff policies and other regulatory measures to
artificially increase transaction costs or even entirely ban such
trade).
If you are checking the prices of digital cameras or DVD players in
different outlets in the electronic town of Akihabara, Tokyo, you are
also a potential arbitrager. You will soon realize that the same
models bear almost exactly the same price, namely LOOP holds
quite firmly in Akihabara. A shuttle trader, or an individual who
carries merchandise, say, from China to Kyrgyzstan, is also

10. engaged in arbitrage. In this case, however, LOOP probably does
not hold exactly due to uncertainty and transportation cost. Sellers
may overcharge without the buyer knowing it. Integrated global
financial markets also exhibits LOOP, and their arbitrage is
extremely fast and tight.
In the case of interest parities, what are equalized are the rates of
return across various interest-bearing financial instruments (bank
deposits, bonds, bills, etc). Under free capital mobility, LOOP holds
firmly and trivially for covered interest parity, but the validity of
LOOP for uncovered interest parity is empirically very questionable.
The difference is explained by the absence or presence of exchange
risk (see below).
Assumptions
In order for interest parities to hold, the following assumptions are
required.
(1) Free capital mobility--there is no official hindrance to arbitrage
across countries.
(2) No transaction cost--there is no natural (market) hindrance to
arbitrage across countries. Transaction is without charge or carries
only a negligible charge.
(3) No default risk--financial investment is safe against business
defaults, country risks, etc.
The above are necessary conditions for covered interest parity.
There are no exchange, default or other risks related to financial
investment. We are assuming a perfectly safe, risk-free world.
In the case of uncovered interest parity, the following assumption is
added.
(4) Risk neutrality--investors care only about the long-run average
return and do not care about the outcome of each investment.
Here, exchange risk is present although all other risks of financial
investment are still assumed away. Investors are assumed to be
neutral against this risk. That means they care only about the
average results. Whether the variance (volatility) of the return of
each investment is large or small does not concern them.
Covered and uncovered interest parities should not be confused
with each other. They refer to two completely different situations.
4)COVERED INTEREST RATE PARITY
{CIP}
What is CIP?
Covered Interest Parity (CIP) is also called covered interest rate
parity. Under the assumption of free capital flow, it states that the

11. forward premium of a foreign currency should be equal to the
interest rate differential between a domestic asset and a
substitutable foreign asset.
CIP implies the equality of returns on comparable financial assets
denominated in different currencies. The underlying mechanism for
CIP is covered interest arbitrage.
What is Covered Interest Arbitrage?
Covered interest arbitrage is the transfer of liquid funds from one
monetary center to another to take advantage of higher rates of
return or interest, while covering the transaction with a forward
currency hedge.
Suppose the 3-month T-bill rate in the U. S. is 12%, higher than
the 3-month T-bill rate of 8% in Canada. Attracted by the higher
interest rate, investors would tend to change their Canadian dollar
into U.S. dollar and invest their funds in the U.S. Simultaneously,
they buy contracts to sell dollars in 3 months in the forward market.
If the spot exchange rate is 1.00CAD/USD at present, and the 3-
month forward exchange rate is 0.99CAD/USD at present, then the
investors' losses in exchange conversion will be 1%. From the
interest rate differential, they will earn 1% in 3 months (since
annually they earn (12%-8%)=4% by investing in U.S. rather than
in Canada). This profit is just offset by the loss. However, if the
interest rate in U.S. is higher, making the earning in interest rate
differential much larger in absolute value than the loss in foreign
exchange, this arbitrage process will continue. Then, large amount
of funds flow from Canada into U.S., putting pressures for U.S. to
lower its interest rate and for Canada to raise its interest rate. In
addition, the increasing demand of U.S. dollar in the current market
tends to raise the spot rate for U.S. dollar. The increasing demand
of Canada dollar in the forward market tends to decrease the future
rate for U.S. dollar. The process continues until returns from
investing in the two countries reach the same level. Then the CIP
conditions will be satisfied again.
When the no-arbitrage condition is satisfied with the use of a forward
contract to hedge against exposure to exchange rate risk, interest rate
parity is said to be covered. Investors will still be indifferent among the
available interest rates in two countries because the forward exchange rate
sustains equilibrium such that the dollar return on dollar deposits is equal
to the dollar return on foreign deposit, thereby eliminating the potential
for covered interest arbitrage profits. Furthermore, covered interest rate
parity helps explain the determination of the forward exchange rate. The
following equation represents covered interest rate parity.[1][4]

12. where
is the forward exchange rate at time t
The dollar return on dollar deposits, , is shown to be equal to the dollar
return on euro deposits, .
Empirical evidence[edit]
Covered interest rate parity (CIRP) is found to hold when there is open
capital mobility and limited capital controls, and this finding is confirmed
for all currencies freely traded in the present-day. One such example is
when the United Kingdom and Germany abolished capital controls
between 1979 and 1981. Maurice Obstfeld and Alan Taylor calculated
hypothetical profits as implied by the expression of a potential inequality
in the CIRP equation (meaning a difference in returns on domestic versus
foreign assets) during the 1960s and 1970s, which would have constituted
arbitrage opportunities if not for the prevalence of capital controls.
However, given financial liberalization and resulting capital mobility,
arbitrage temporarily became possible until equilibrium was restored.
Since the abolition of capital controls in the United Kingdom and
Germany, potential arbitrage profits have been near zero. Factoring
in transaction costs arising from fees and other regulations, arbitrage
opportunities are fleeting or nonexistent when such costs exceed
deviations from parity.[1][5] While CIRP generally holds, it does not hold
with precision due to the presence of transaction costs, political
risks, tax implications for interest earnings versus gains from foreign
exchange, and differences in the liquidity of domestic versus foreign
assets.[5][6][7] Researchers found evidence that significant deviations from
CIRP during the onset of the global financial crisis in 2007 and 2008 were
driven by concerns over risk posed by counter parties to banks and
financial institutions in Europe and the US in the foreign exchange
swap market. The European Central Bank's efforts to provide US dollar
liquidity in the foreign exchange swap market, along with similar efforts
by theFederal Reserve, had a moderating impact on CIRP deviations
between the dollar and the euro. Such a scenario was found to be

13. reminiscent of deviations from CIRP during the 1990s driven by
struggling Japanese banks which looked toward foreign exchange swap
markets to try and acquire dollars to bolster their creditworthiness.[8]
When both covered and uncovered interest rate parity (UIRP) hold, such a
condition sheds light on a noteworthy relationship between the forward
and expected future spot exchange rates, as demonstrated below.
Dividing the equation for UIRP by the equation for CIRP yields the
following equation:
which can be rewritten as:
This equation represents the unbiasedness hypothesis, which states that
the forward exchange rate is an unbiased predictor of the future spot
exchange rate.[9][10] Given strong evidence that CIRP holds, the forward
rate unbiasedness hypothesis can serve as a test to determine whether
UIRP holds (in order for the forward rate and spot rate to be equal, both
CIRP and UIRP conditions must hold). Evidence for the validity and
accuracy of the unbiasedness hypothesis, particularly evidence
for cointegration between the forward rate and future spot rate, is mixed
as researchers have published numerous papers demonstrating both
empirical support and empirical failure of the hypothesis.[9]
UIRP is found to have some empirical support
in tests for correlation between expected rates of currency
depreciation and the forward premium or discount.[1] Evidence suggests
that whether UIRP holds depends on the currency examined, and
deviations from UIRP have been found to be less substantial when
examining longer time horizons.[11] Some studies of monetary policy have
offered explanations for why UIRP fails empirically. Researchers
demonstrated that if a central bank manages interest rate spreads in
strong response to the previous period's spreads, that interest rate
spreads had negative coefficients in regression tests of UIRP. Another
study which set up a model wherein the central bank's monetary policy

14. responds to exogenous shocks, that the central bank's smoothing of
interest rates can explain empirical failures of UIRP.[12] A study of central
bank interventions on the US dollar and Deutsche mark found only
limited evidence of any substantial effect on deviations from
UIRP.[13] UIRP has been found to hold over very small spans of time
(covering only a number of hours) with a high frequency of bilateral
exchange rate data.[14] Tests of UIRP for economies experiencing
institutional regime changes, using monthly exchange rate data for the
US dollar versus the Deutsche mark and the Spanish peseta versus
the British pound, have found some evidence that UIRP held when US
and German regime changes were volatile, and held between Spain and
the United Kingdom particularly after Spain joined the European Union in
1986 and began liberalizing capital mobility.[15]
Covered Interest Rate theory states that exchange rate forward
premiums (discounts) offset interest rate differentials between two
sovereigns.
In another words, covered interest rate theory holds that interest
rate differentials between two countries are offset by the
spot/forward currency premiums as otherwise investors could earn
a pure arbitrage profit.
Covered Interest Rate Examples
Assume Google Inc., the U.S. based multi-national company,
needs to pay it's European employees in Euro in a month's time.
Google Inc. can achieve this in several ways viz:
 Buy Euro forward 30 days to lock in the exchange rate. Then
Google can invest in dollars for 30 days until it must convert
dollars to Euro in a month. This is called covering because now
Google Inc. has no exchange rate fluctuation risk.
 Convert dollars to Euro today at spot exchange rate. Invest
Euro in a European bond (in Euro) for 30 days (equivalently loan
out Euro for 30 days) then pay it's obligation in Euro at the end of
the month.
Under this model Google Inc. is sure of the interest rate that it will
earn, so it may convert fewer dollars to Euro today as it's Euro will
grow via interest earned.
This is also called covering because by converting dollars to Euro
at the spot, the risk of exchange rate fluctuation is eliminated.

15. When people and firms are permitted to buy and sell foreign
assets, they can hold various exchange "positions," which are net
holding balances in foreign currency. The positions are classified
below.
Position Balance sheet situation
If home
currency
depreciates
If home
currency
appreciates
Open"
"Long" Foreign assets > foreign liabilities Gain Loss
"Short" Foreign assets < foreign liabilities Loss Gain
"Square" Foreign assets = foreign liabilities No impact
For example, suppose you have foreign securities worth $500 but
have also borrowed $700 from the bank.. This means that you
have the short position of $200. For simplicity, we assume all
foreign assets and liabilities are denominated in USD. This allows
us to concentrate on the movement of the domestic currency
against USD, without worrying about the fluctuations among major
currencies.
Suppose you are a manufacturer of a certain product and also
engaged in foreign trade. As you conduct your daily transactions of
buying foreign parts or exporting finished products to foreign
markets, the exchange position naturally fluctuates and does not
remain "square." This means that you may incur gain or loss
depending on the exchange rate movement at any moment, which
is often hard to predict. Suppose also that your main business is
manufacturing and you are not interested in foreign currency
speculation. Particularly, you want to avoid exchange losses.
If your country has sufficiently developed and externally open
financial markets, there are two alternative ways to "cover" or
"hedge"--i.e., make your exchange position square and avoid
exchange risk (see handout no.4). More concretely, assume that
you are a Japanese exporter of an industrial product expecting a
receipt of $100 after 3 months. You want to fix this receipt in
terms of yen (domestic currency) now. Suppose also that:
S (spot exchange rate) is currently $1=100 yen
F (3-month forward exchange rate) is--initially--$1=102
yen
i (Japanese interest rate) is 4%/year
i* (US interest rate) is 6%/year
The first method is forward cover. You go to a bank and make a
forward contract today. That is to say, you agree to sell $100 to
the bank after 3 months and receive a specified amount of yen

16. (10,200 yen = $100 x 102) at that time. Then you wait for 3
months before executing this transaction. The exchange rate for
selling USD in the future (forward rate, 102), offered by the bank,
is different from the exchange rate for today (spot rate, 100).
The second method is borrow dollar and sell spot now. That is to
say, you go to a bank and borrow $98.52 today, immediately
convert it to yen (9,852yen) in the spot market and deposit it at
the bank. After 3 months, you withdraw 9,951 yen (principal plus
accrued interest) and simultaneously repay $100 (principal plus
accrued interest) to the bank with the export receipt.
Either way, you fix the yen receipt as of today so there is no
exchange risk. But with the assumptions illustrated above, forward
cover yields 10,200 yen and the borrowing method yields only
9,951 yen. Clearly, everyone prefers the first method. That means
that the situation is not in equilibrium.
If everyone tries to sell USD forward while no one buys USD
forward, there will be an oversupply of forward dollar and its price
will fall. It will fall until forward USD becomes precisely $1=99.51
yen; because at this rate, the first and second method will be
equivalent. This is an example of financial arbitrage and LOOP. The
same "commodity" (export receipt after three months' wait)
obtained through the forward exchange market and the bank loan
market now bears the same price. Needless to say, actual interest
arbitrage occurs instantaneously, not sequentially and slowly.
The CIP condition can be written as follows:
(F-S)/S = (i-i*)/(1+i*)
or approximately,
(F-S)/S = i - i*
if i* is sufficiently small. This means that
F>S if and only if i > i*
F<S if and only if i < i*
In words, if the domestic interest rate is higher than the foreign
interest rate, the forward exchange rate (future dollar) must be
higher than the spot exchange rate (today's dollar), and vice
versa. This relationship should always hold among high-quality,
low-risk financial instruments under capital mobility.
Testing capital mobility
CIP can be used as a test for capital mobility. Sometimes the
government says capital movement is liberalized but actual
transactions are secretly controlled. If CIP holds, we can say that
the country truly has an open capital market. The UK liberalized its
capital market externally in 1979. Thereafter, CIP began to hold
(see p.122 of Batiz-Batiz). Japan revised its foreign exchange law
in December 1980, and CIP began to hold after that. Since then,
CIP has always held between Japan and the US (handout no.4).

17. Since virtually all developed countries in North America, EU and
Japan have open capital markets, CIP holds trivially and as a
matter of course among key currencies of dollar, euro and yen--it
would be surprising if the situation is otherwise (but not between
Russia and China). You can check this with financial news reports
on any day. The following is the data for April 18, 2002 as
published in Nihon Keizai Shimbun (Japan Economic Journal,
or Nikkei for short), the most influential Japanese economic
newspaper:
CIP between Japan and the US (April 18, 2002)
Source: Nikkei, the next day
Bilateral interest rate differential, (i
- i*)
-1.7375%
Japanese interest rate, i (CD 3-
month)
i =
0.0825%
American interest rate, i* (CD 3-
month)
i* = 1.82%
Forward premium/discount on the
dollar, (F-S)/S
-1.86%
Gap between (i - i*) and (F-S)/S 0.1225%
While there is a small gap between the interest rate differential
and the forward discount, the magnitude is fairly small. Even if CIP
is holding, statistical discrepancy can arise from various reasons:
(i) time difference between Tokyo and NY markets (data are not
taken exactly at the same moment); (ii) Japanese and US
certificate of deposits (CDs) are not perfectly substitutable due to
different liquidity, tax rules, regulations, etc; and (iii) transaction
costs.
There are a few additional remarks on CIP:
(1) Don't try to perform CIP yourself. Arbitrage for CIP is
automatic and instantaneous. Leave it to banks and financial
companies.
(2) While causality is often mutual in economics, we can say that,
for CIP, main causality runs from the interest rate gap to the
forward exchange rate. In other words, F is determined by the
difference between i and i*.
(3) Some exchange risks cannot be hedged (or covered).
Unhedgeable exchange risks include the following:
(i) Protection against a high or low exchange rate level, in contrast
to protection against change from now to future. No banks will
help you even if you complain about the current exchange rate
level.

18. (ii) Long-term exchange risks. Usually, forward markets beyond 1
year are either nonexistent or extremely thin.
(iii) Business risks which are inseparable from exchange risk. If
you are a manufacturing firm, your business carries many risks
other than the exchange risk. You don't know whether your
factories will operate smoothly without technical or labor troubles,
whether the market will grow, and whether you can beat other
competitors. Because these business uncertainties always exist,
you don't know what exchange positions you will have next month,
next year, or beyond. But if you don't know them, you can't go to
the bank and hedge them! While fancy financial instruments like
futures, options and swaps are available, exchange risk cannot be
eliminated but must be added to the existing business risks.
Technically speaking, this problem arises from the incompleteness
of forward commodity contracts. Ronald McKinnon calls this
the Arrow-Debreu dilemma.
How can we explain deviations from
CIP?
Academically, the empirical deviations from CIP are always
explained as violations to the assumption of free capital flow and
the substitutability of assets from different countries. The possible
explanations include:
1. There may be transaction costs, which introduces a
"transaction band" into the CIP equation. Recently, Cody (1990),
Moosa (1996) and Balke and Wohar (1998) studied about the
relation between CIP and the transaction costs.
2. There may be possible capital controls, which actually adds
costs to the investment in other countries and creates similar
effects of the transaction costs to the CIP equation.
3. There may be difference in tax rates on interest income and
foreign exchange losses/gains in different countries. This
difference contributes to the non-substitutability of investments in
different countries and makes investment in a country more
preferable than the other.
5)UNCOVERED INTEREST RATE PARITY
{UIP}

19. What is UIP?
UIP states that if funds flow freely across country boarders and
investors are risk neutral, after the adjustment of expected
depreciation, the expected rates of return to substitutable assets
denominated in different currencies should be equal. In equation,
it is expressed as the equality between the expected changes in
spot exchange rate and the interest differentials of two countries.
Like that of CIP, the underlying mechanism of UIP is interest
arbitrage activities. For example, if domestic interest rate is lower
than the expected rate of return on an identical foreign asset,
investors