WorksheetsProject Finance Quiz (Chapter 8)
Total questions: 60
Worksheet time: 30mins
According to the Basel Committee, a loan qualifies as “Specialized Lending” primarily because:
It finances financial portfolios.
It is granted to multinational corporations.
Its repayment depends mainly on project cash flows.
It involves multiple unrelated sponsors.
It is secured by government guarantees.
Under Basel rules, which characteristic does not define Specialized Lending?
Use of SPV borrower.
Dependence on project’s future cash flow.
Loan used to finance tangible assets.
Full recourse to sponsor balance sheet.
Lender control over project assets.
Which of the following would most likely be classified as corporate exposure rather than project finance under Basel II?
A toll road financed by an SPV with traffic risk.
A wind farm selling power under a 25-year take-or-pay PPA with a AAA offtaker.
A shipping project with revenues depending on charter rates.
A greenfield LNG plant with construction risk.
A new stadium with volatile ticket demand.
Which is not one of the five Specialized Lending subcategories under Basel?
Project Finance
Object Finance
Commodity Finance
Infrastructure Leasing
High-Volatility Commercial Real Estate
Which Basel framework introduced the concept of slotting criteria for project finance?
Basel I
Basel II
Basel 2.5
Basel III
Basel IV
The Basel Committee’s main reason for creating a separate SL category was:
To encourage banks to fund infrastructure projects.
Because project-finance risk differs from traditional corporate risk.
To reduce capital requirements on long-term loans.
To simplify accounting for SPVs.
To regulate construction contractors.
Under Basel’s Specialized Lending framework, the borrower’s legal form is typically:
A joint-stock company with multiple divisions.
An SPV created solely for the project.
A bank subsidiary.
A private equity fund.
A sovereign borrower.
Basel’s treatment of Specialized Lending exposures primarily impacts:
Sponsor’s equity cost.
Bank’s liquidity coverage ratio.
Bank’s regulatory capital requirement.
Government fiscal deficit.
EPC contractor’s profit margin.
Which Basel III reform most directly affects long-term project finance lending capacity?
Leverage ratio limit
Liquidity Coverage Ratio (LCR)
Countercyclical buffer
Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR)
Market risk capital charge
Under Basel’s definitions, “self-liquidating” exposure refers to:
Debt repaid through asset sale proceeds.
Debt automatically written off.
Equity funded through dividends.
Projects refinanced by government bonds.
Sponsor guarantees fully covering repayment.
Basel’s slotting approach classifies project finance loans into how many categories (excluding default)?
Two
Three
Four
Five
Six
Which of the following is not one of the five qualitative assessment factors in Basel’s rating system?
Financial strength
Sponsor strength
Transaction characteristics
Political and legal environment
Market capitalization of the sponsor
A project with solid DSCR, strong contracts, and reputable sponsors would most likely fall into which slotting category?
Strong
Good
Satisfactory
Weak
Default
Under Basel, a “Weak” project is likely characterized by:
Strong financial ratios and enforceable contracts.
Unproven technology and limited sponsor support.
Proven operational record.
Long-term offtake agreements with AAA buyers.
The financial strength criterion evaluates primarily:
Project governance
DSCR, leverage, and reserve accounts
Sponsor reputation
EPC contractor’s shareholding
Insurance coverage
The political and legal environment factor assesses:
Shareholder voting rights
Country’s regulatory and contract enforcement stability
Bank’s internal credit policy
EPC contractor quality
Technical design risk
The transaction characteristics factor deals mainly with:
The sponsor’s country risk
The project’s technical, construction, and market risk structure
Tax benefits of SPV
Financial guarantees issued by banks
Accounting treatments
Sponsor strength provides:
Moral support only
No impact on risk rating
Implicit credit enhancement
Guaranteed repayment by parent company
Currency hedging
Mitigants such as step-in rights and escrow accounts primarily reduce:
Probability of Default (PD)
Loss Given Default (LGD)
Exposure at Default (EAD)
Construction risk
Sovereign risk
The slotting approach assigns lower risk weights to:
Projects with limited recourse
Projects with strong structure and proven performance
Greenfield projects under construction
Highly leveraged speculative projects
Projects with weak sponsors
Under Basel II, a “Strong” project finance exposure typically carries a risk weight of:
50%
70%
90%
In the Foundation IRB approach, banks estimate:
LGD only
PD only
Both PD and LGD
Only EAD
None — all fixed by regulator
Under Advanced IRB, banks may estimate:
PD, LGD, and EAD
PD only
LGD only
EAD only
Only risk weights
Higher risk weights in Basel’s slotting approach imply:
Lower regulatory capital requirement
Higher capital and higher loan pricing
Lower interest margins
Reduced construction risk
Guaranteed government support
Basel initially viewed project finance as:
Equal in risk to corporate loans
More risky than corporate loans
Less risky than sovereign loans
Noncredit exposure
Fully risk-free
Banks criticized Basel’s early view because:
It ignored sovereign risk.
It underestimated construction delays.
It lacked empirical justification for higher PF risk weights.
It favored small banks.
It duplicated accounting rules.
A direct consequence of overestimating PF risk in regulation would be:
Cheaper financing
Reduced bank appetite for PF loans
Increased public-private partnerships
Lower DSCR thresholds
Reduced equity requirements
Basel’s capital charge for PF is based on:
Project size
Borrower nationality
Risk weight × exposure × 8%
Which Basel III reform indirectly increases the cost of PF lending?
Countercyclical buffer
Higher common equity ratio
Market risk revisions
NSFR requirements
All of the above
Basel’s conservative stance on PF credit risk was later proven:
Overly optimistic
Statistically unjustified and too conservative
Accurate
Favorable to borrowers
Limited to real estate projects
IFC’s study (1956–2001) found PF loss rate:
5.5%
4.1%
3.1%
2.1%
1.1%
The IFC concluded that PF risk profile corresponded to corporate ratings of:
CCC
BB+ to BBB–
A to AA
B– to BB
AAA
The 4-bank consortium study estimated average LGD around:
10%
25%
45%
60%
75%
According to Moody’s 2010 data, project-finance 10-year PD was approximately:
5%
8%
11.5%
20%
25%
Recovery rates for projects in operation phase average around:
60%
67%
Construction-phase defaults generally have recovery rates around:
50%
60%
67%
75%
85%
Empirical studies showed project-finance loans perform:
Worse than corporates
About the same
Better than corporates (lower PD, higher recovery)
Volatile and unpredictable
Only in public sector
A key reason for PF’s strong recovery rates is:
Lenders’ recourse to sponsor’s assets
Liquid secondary market for projects
High collateralization and contractual rights
Government bailouts
Political intervention
Which empirical source most influenced the Basel revision debate?
Moody’s PF report
IFC portfolio data
World Bank infrastructure survey
Fitch sovereign default study
IMF liquidity research
From empirical findings, the most critical phase for default risk is:
Pre-construction
Construction
Operation
Refinancing
Decommissioning
Expected Loss (EL) is calculated as:
EL = EAD / LGD
EL = PD + LGD + EAD
EL = PD × LGD × EAD
EL = EAD × (1–LGD)
EL = PD × Recovery Rate
Unexpected Loss (UL) represents:
Average expected credit loss
Volatility or uncertainty around expected loss
In Basel’s capital adequacy, capital mainly covers:
Expected Loss
Unexpected Loss
Total assets
LGD
Operational risk
EL is typically covered by:
Insurance
Loan pricing and provisions
Tax subsidies
Equity infusion
Bond guarantees
Value at Risk (VaR) quantifies:
Average annual loss
Worst-case loss over time at chosen confidence level
Total loan exposure
Sponsor’s equity risk
Minimum recovery rate
Monte Carlo simulation in PF risk analysis is used to:
Randomly allocate debt
Forecast thousands of cash-flow scenarios
Determine tax rates
Calculate bond yields
Estimate IRR only
Which variable is not typically stochastic in PF Monte Carlo models?
Revenue volume
Construction delay
DSCR
Contract enforceability
Input costs
A project with PD = 5%, LGD = 30%, EAD = $100m has EL =
$1.5m
$5m
$15m
$30m
$50m
LGD of 25% implies recovery rate of:
25%
50%
Unexpected Loss depends heavily on:
PD variance and asset correlation
Inflation rates
Sponsor shareholding
Government subsidies
Debt maturity
Higher DSCR mainly reduces:
PD
LGD
EAD
Sovereign risk
Political risk
Step-in rights help lenders by:
Enhancing project revenue
Allowing operational control after default
Lowering construction cost
Reducing government approval time
Increasing sponsor returns
Political-risk insurance affects:
PD only
LGD only
Both PD and LGD
Neither
Only sponsor equity
Projects with fixed-price, date-certain EPC contracts benefit mainly by reducing:
Operational risk
Construction risk
Market risk
Financial risk
Sovereign risk
Higher leverage in PF structures typically:
Lowers sponsor IRR
Increases lender’s credit risk
Reduces risk weight
Improves DSCR
Strengthens balance sheet
A long-term offtake contract with a creditworthy buyer primarily mitigates:
Operational risk
Construction risk
Which risk is most mitigated by long-term contracts in PF?
Construction risk
Refinancing risk
Market or demand risk
Sovereign risk
Legal risk
Basel’s overestimation of PF risk primarily resulted from:
Lack of default data in early studies
Miscalculation of currency exposures
Ignoring equity IRRs
Political bias
Pressure from rating agencies
A project with high LGD but low PD is most likely:
Stable but poorly secured
Volatile and well insured
Overleveraged and speculative
Early-stage without sponsors
Guaranteed by sovereign
The phase where correlation among defaults is highest across PF portfolios is:
Construction phase
Operation phase
Refinancing phase
Maturity phase
Decommissioning
