Mutual Fund Mastery puzzles, solved step by step
- Puzzles
- 100
- Traced to a firm
- 29
- Topics
- 13
- Hard
- 30
088Five funds, A to E, are ranked by one-year return with no ties. C beat A but trailed E. A was neither first nor last. B finished immediately behind A. B beat D. What is the order from first to last, and which of the clues did you not actually need?Indian AMCsGlobal asset managers
Try it first
Which fund finished first?
Show the worked solution
E, C, A, B, D, and two of the clues were not needed. C beat A but trailed E gives E ahead of C ahead of A. B behind A extends the chain, and B beat D adds D at the end: one line of five, so the order is fixed. A being neither first nor last, and B being immediately rather than merely behind A, are both already true of that chain.
Where do you start with a ranking puzzle?
Seating guests at a dinner, you place the couple who must sit together before the guest who will sit anywhere. Start with the clues that relate two items directly, and join them into chains; a chain that runs through every item fixes the whole order at once. Here every 'beat' clue shares a fund with another clue: E over C, C over A, A over B, B over D. Each clue hands the next one a fund to hang on, so the chain builds without any guessing.
Joining the three ordering clues makes one chain of all five funds, E ahead of C ahead of A ahead of B ahead of D, so the positions are fixed before the clue about A's position or the word immediately is ever used. How do you know the order is the only one?
Because the chain is complete. Every fund sits on one line of 'finished ahead of' links, so there is no fund whose position is free to move. When a chain touches all five items, uniqueness is proved, not hoped for. If any fund had hung off the chain, say D with only 'B beat D' and no other link, you would have had to test each place it could go. Checking uniqueness out loud is what separates a candidate who got lucky from one who reasoned.
Why would an interviewer include clues you do not need?
Two pieces of the puzzle are redundant. A being neither first nor last follows from A sitting third in the chain. And the word immediately adds nothing: B merely behind A is enough, because once E and C are ahead of A and D is behind B, there is no fund left that could sit between A and B. Spotting redundancy shows that you checked what each clue does rather than ticking them off. Interviewers also use extra clues to tempt you into starting from a weak one; A's 'neither first nor last' narrows A to three places, which feels like progress and fixes nothing.
The fund-desk version of the same habit is reading a factsheet. A list of statements about a fund, its rank, its category, its risk grade, often contains claims that follow from each other, and the analyst's job is to find the few that carry information.
Where candidates lose it
The common loss is starting with 'A was neither first nor last', trying A in second, third and fourth place, and running a case for each. It works eventually, but it is slow and looks like guesswork, and under time pressure candidates drop a case and give a wrong order.
The second loss is giving the right order without proving it is the only one. Say the chain touches all five funds, so nothing can move, then name the two clues you never used.
What the interviewer asks next
- Remove the clue that B beat D. How many orders are now possible?
- Which single clue, if removed, would leave the order unchanged and still fully determined?
- Six funds now, with F known only to have beaten C. Where can F go?
