This is the Vocab24 daily quiz of 11 May 2025, the same 30 questions the app served that day, on the day's vocabulary and editorial. One mark for a right answer, minus 0.25 for a wrong one; the explanation opens as soon as you tap.
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Staggering
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Invokes
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Exempt
Out of the given alternatives select the alternative which best expresses the meaning of given word.
Seemed
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Desire
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Invasion
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Narrative
Out of the given alternatives select the word opposite in meaning to the given word.
Immense
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Call on (a deity or spirit) in prayer, as a witness, or for inspiration.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
To want something, especially strongly.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
An instance of invading a country or region with an armed force.
Out of given alternatives, choose the word which can be substituted for the given words/ sentence.
Inspiring respect and admiration
A statement with one blank is given below. Choose the set of words from the given options which can be used to fill the given blank.
If he works hard he ____ pass.
Explanation: Above incomplete sentence is in mood of Conditional Sentence. After filling up the gap the sentence has turned into an example of Probable Conditional Sentence.<br> Probable Conditional Sentence means it can happen in reality. Here 'pass' will happen if hard work is done by him. <br> In Probable Conditional Sentence 'if clause' is written in Simpler Present Tense and next part of the sentence is written in Simple Future Tense. 'If he works hard' is written in Present Indefinite Tense and 'he will pass' is written in Future Indefinite Tense.
A statement with one blank is given below. Choose the set of words from the given options which can be used to fill the given blank.
Either you or I should ____ the lead.
Explanation: If the noun is plural the verb should be in plural. Here 'you or I' makes the noun plural and therefore 'take' is used.
A statement with one blank is given below. Choose the set of words from the given options which can be used to fill the given blank.
You ____ got ready before we visit your house.
Explanation: Definition: The sentence refers to an action that must be completed before another future event ('before we visit your house'). This requires the use of the future perfect tense, which is formed using 'will have + past participle'. Correct Answer: <br> The correct option is Option A: will have. Explanation: <br> - The future perfect tense is used to describe an action that will be completed before a specific time or event in the future. <br> - The structure for the future perfect tense is: Subject + will have + past participle. <br> - The phrase 'got ready' is the past participle form of 'get ready,' so the correct verb choice is 'will have' to indicate completion before the visit. <br> - The correct sentence is: You will have got ready before we visit your house. <br> Why Other Options Are Incorrect: <br> - Option B: shall have → Incorrect because 'shall' is less commonly used in modern English for future perfect constructions, except in very formal contexts. <br> - Option C: are → Incorrect because 'are' is present tense and does not indicate completion before a future event. <br> - Option D: were → Incorrect because 'were' is past tense, but the sentence refers to a future action. <br> Final Answer: Option A: will have.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
The aroma from the kitchen <u>makes my mouth water</u>.
Explanation: Makes my mouth water: to make someone hungry (for something).
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
Things are progressing well. Don't do anything <u>to rock the boat. </u>
Explanation: to rock the boat: say or do something to disturb an existing situation and upset people.
Out of given alternatives select the option which best expresses the meaning of given idiom/ phrase.
His father advised him to be <u>fair and square</u> in his dealings lest he should fall into trouble.
Explanation: fair and square: honestly and straightforwardly.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the Correct Spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the Correct Spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the Correct Spelling.
Out of given alternatives select the word which is correctly spelt.
Choose the Correct Spelling.
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
The amount of foreign direct investment in (a)/ the country in 2008 is (b)/ doubled that received in 1997. (c) / No error (d)
Explanation: double
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
The details of the scheme (a)/ will be made clearly to the public by (b)/ the end of the financial year (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: made clear
Which of phrases given below each sentence should replace the phrase printed in bold type to make the grammatically correct? If the sentence is correct as it is, mark 'd' as the answer.
Government officials have been working overrime to answer queries raised (a)/ by banks on numerous of (b)/ issues pertaining to the loan waiver. (c)/ No error (d)
Explanation: ommit 'of'
Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> During the financial crisis, Western governments poured hundreds of billions of dollars into their banks to avert collapse. The search for ways to avoid future bailouts started before the turmoil ended. One of the niftiest proposals was the 'contingent convertible' (coco) bond, which turns into equity when the ratio of a bank's equity to risk-weighted assets falls below a predetermined danger point (since set at a minimum of 5.125% for cocos, although it can be up to around 7%). The ambition was grand. As the Squam Lake Group, composed of mostly American academics, put it in 2009, the automatic conversion of cocos would 'transform an undercapitalised or insolvent bank into a well-capitalised bank at no cost to taxpayers'. <br><br> At first, regulators were keen. In 2010 Mervyn King, then the governor of the Bank of England, said he wanted contingent capital to be a 'major part of the liability structure of the banking system'. Swiss regulators, too, pushed for coco issuance. The hybrid nature of cocos seemed a way to satisfy both regulators, who wanted banks to have bigger safety buffers, and bankers, who were reluctant to issue new shares because of the high cost of capital. The hope was that investors, too, might see the appeal of an asset that offered a higher yield than bank bonds but lower risk than bank shares. <br><br> Nine years after the first cocos were issued by Lloyds Banking Group in Britain, they have not fulfilled this promise. To be sure, they are now an established asset class, with around $155bn of issuance in 2017 in Dollars, Euros and Pounds. But this is a fraction of more than $1trn in bank debt issued that year. Cocos are issued by only around 50 banks in a dozen countries mostly in Europe. Although cocos are held by the world's largest asset managers, including BlackRock and PIMCO, few specialise in them. Exceptions include niche funds run by Algebris Investment and Old Mutual Global Investors. <br><br> The main reason is that, despite early enthusiasm, regulators did not throw their weight behind cocos. In 2011, the Financial Stability Board, a global grouping of regulators, decided that they would not count towards the capital 'surcharge' the biggest banks would be required to hold. Only equity would do. Rules on 'total loss absorption capacity' finalised in 2015 require banks to have liabilities that can take a haircut or be wiped out if they are liquidated or restructured. But a wide range of liabilities, from shares to subordinated and even senior debt, is included. Cocos became part of a spectrum of at-risk liabilities, rather than a neat, catch-all solution. <br><br> The result is that cocos are a specialised investment proposition. They still offer fairly high yields-currently 5.3% for dollar cocos and 3% for those in euros, according to indices compiled by Credit Suisse, a bank. And they offer a premium over junior debt. They have appealing technical characteristics, too. Unlike bonds with a fixed maturity, they are perpetual, but redeemable after five years. If not redeemed, their coupon resets with reference to the mid-swap rate, a widely used rate related to interbank lending rates. That offers some protection against inflation. In 2016 investor jitters caused a spike in coco yields. But since then, nerves have calmed and spreads have narrowed.
As per the passage, what is meant by 'coco'?
Explanation: Refer to: <br><br> ... The search for ways to avoid future bail-outs started before the turmoil ended. <br><br> One of the niftiest proposals was the 'contingent convertible' (coco) bond, which turns into equity when the ratio of a bank's equity to risk-weighted assets falls below a predetermined danger poi. ... <br><br> As per the fragment highlighted above, only option D mentions all the relevant points. Hence, option D is correct.
Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> During the financial crisis, Western governments poured hundreds of billions of dollars into their banks to avert collapse. The search for ways to avoid future bailouts started before the turmoil ended. One of the niftiest proposals was the 'contingent convertible' (coco) bond, which turns into equity when the ratio of a bank's equity to risk-weighted assets falls below a predetermined danger point (since set at a minimum of 5.125% for cocos, although it can be up to around 7%). The ambition was grand. As the Squam Lake Group, composed of mostly American academics, put it in 2009, the automatic conversion of cocos would 'transform an undercapitalised or insolvent bank into a well-capitalised bank at no cost to taxpayers'. <br><br> At first, regulators were keen. In 2010 Mervyn King, then the governor of the Bank of England, said he wanted contingent capital to be a 'major part of the liability structure of the banking system'. Swiss regulators, too, pushed for coco issuance. The hybrid nature of cocos seemed a way to satisfy both regulators, who wanted banks to have bigger safety buffers, and bankers, who were reluctant to issue new shares because of the high cost of capital. The hope was that investors, too, might see the appeal of an asset that offered a higher yield than bank bonds but lower risk than bank shares. <br><br> Nine years after the first cocos were issued by Lloyds Banking Group in Britain, they have not fulfilled this promise. To be sure, they are now an established asset class, with around $155bn of issuance in 2017 in Dollars, Euros and Pounds. But this is a fraction of more than $1trn in bank debt issued that year. Cocos are issued by only around 50 banks in a dozen countries mostly in Europe. Although cocos are held by the world's largest asset managers, including BlackRock and PIMCO, few specialise in them. Exceptions include niche funds run by Algebris Investment and Old Mutual Global Investors. <br><br> The main reason is that, despite early enthusiasm, regulators did not throw their weight behind cocos. In 2011, the Financial Stability Board, a global grouping of regulators, decided that they would not count towards the capital 'surcharge' the biggest banks would be required to hold. Only equity would do. Rules on 'total loss absorption capacity' finalised in 2015 require banks to have liabilities that can take a haircut or be wiped out if they are liquidated or restructured. But a wide range of liabilities, from shares to subordinated and even senior debt, is included. Cocos became part of a spectrum of at-risk liabilities, rather than a neat, catch-all solution. <br><br> The result is that cocos are a specialised investment proposition. They still offer fairly high yields-currently 5.3% for dollar cocos and 3% for those in euros, according to indices compiled by Credit Suisse, a bank. And they offer a premium over junior debt. They have appealing technical characteristics, too. Unlike bonds with a fixed maturity, they are perpetual, but redeemable after five years. If not redeemed, their coupon resets with reference to the mid-swap rate, a widely used rate related to interbank lending rates. That offers some protection against inflation. In 2016 investor jitters caused a spike in coco yields. But since then, nerves have calmed and spreads have narrowed.
As per the Squam Lake Group, what was the biggest benefit of the coco bonds? <br> I. It would keep the costs to manage customer accounts to a bare minimum. <br> II. It was an off-balance sheet item and would not increase the liability of the banks. <br> III. It would help in capitalizing the undercapitalized banks without any extra costs.
Explanation: Refer to: <br><br> ... As the Squam Lake Group, composed of mostly American academics, put it in 2009, the automatic conversion of cocos would 'transform an undercapitalised or insolvent bank into a well-capitalised bank at no cost to taxpayers'. ... <br><br> As per the fragment highlighted above, only III is correct while I and II have not been mentioned anywhere. <br><br> Hence, option B is correct.
Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> During the financial crisis, Western governments poured hundreds of billions of dollars into their banks to avert collapse. The search for ways to avoid future bailouts started before the turmoil ended. One of the niftiest proposals was the 'contingent convertible' (coco) bond, which turns into equity when the ratio of a bank's equity to risk-weighted assets falls below a predetermined danger point (since set at a minimum of 5.125% for cocos, although it can be up to around 7%). The ambition was grand. As the Squam Lake Group, composed of mostly American academics, put it in 2009, the automatic conversion of cocos would 'transform an undercapitalised or insolvent bank into a well-capitalised bank at no cost to taxpayers'. <br><br> At first, regulators were keen. In 2010 Mervyn King, then the governor of the Bank of England, said he wanted contingent capital to be a 'major part of the liability structure of the banking system'. Swiss regulators, too, pushed for coco issuance. The hybrid nature of cocos seemed a way to satisfy both regulators, who wanted banks to have bigger safety buffers, and bankers, who were reluctant to issue new shares because of the high cost of capital. The hope was that investors, too, might see the appeal of an asset that offered a higher yield than bank bonds but lower risk than bank shares. <br><br> Nine years after the first cocos were issued by Lloyds Banking Group in Britain, they have not fulfilled this promise. To be sure, they are now an established asset class, with around $155bn of issuance in 2017 in Dollars, Euros and Pounds. But this is a fraction of more than $1trn in bank debt issued that year. Cocos are issued by only around 50 banks in a dozen countries mostly in Europe. Although cocos are held by the world's largest asset managers, including BlackRock and PIMCO, few specialise in them. Exceptions include niche funds run by Algebris Investment and Old Mutual Global Investors. <br><br> The main reason is that, despite early enthusiasm, regulators did not throw their weight behind cocos. In 2011, the Financial Stability Board, a global grouping of regulators, decided that they would not count towards the capital 'surcharge' the biggest banks would be required to hold. Only equity would do. Rules on 'total loss absorption capacity' finalised in 2015 require banks to have liabilities that can take a haircut or be wiped out if they are liquidated or restructured. But a wide range of liabilities, from shares to subordinated and even senior debt, is included. Cocos became part of a spectrum of at-risk liabilities, rather than a neat, catch-all solution. <br><br> The result is that cocos are a specialised investment proposition. They still offer fairly high yields-currently 5.3% for dollar cocos and 3% for those in euros, according to indices compiled by Credit Suisse, a bank. And they offer a premium over junior debt. They have appealing technical characteristics, too. Unlike bonds with a fixed maturity, they are perpetual, but redeemable after five years. If not redeemed, their coupon resets with reference to the mid-swap rate, a widely used rate related to interbank lending rates. That offers some protection against inflation. In 2016 investor jitters caused a spike in coco yields. But since then, nerves have calmed and spreads have narrowed.
As per the passage, why would investors want to invest in coco bonds? <br> I. As cocos could play a major part in helping the banks become safer. <br> II. As they wanted banks to have bigger safety buffer. <br> III. As they were reluctant to invest in equity shares of the banks. <br> IV. As cocos offered better yields than normal bank bonds with lesser risk.
Explanation: Refer to: <br><br> ... The hybrid nature of cocos seemed a way to satisfy both regulators, who wanted banks to have bigger safety buffers, and bankers, who were reluctant to issue new shares because of the high cost of capital. The hope was that investors, too, might see the appeal of an asset that offered a higher yield than bank bonds but lower risk than bank shares. ... <br><br> As per the highlighted fragment, only IV is the reason for investors to invest in the bonds. <br><br> I and II are reasons for regulators to prefer cocos while III is irrelevant and not mentioned in the passage. <br><br> Hence, option A is correct.
Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> During the financial crisis, Western governments poured hundreds of billions of dollars into their banks to avert collapse. The search for ways to avoid future bailouts started before the turmoil ended. One of the niftiest proposals was the 'contingent convertible' (coco) bond, which turns into equity when the ratio of a bank's equity to risk-weighted assets falls below a predetermined danger point (since set at a minimum of 5.125% for cocos, although it can be up to around 7%). The ambition was grand. As the Squam Lake Group, composed of mostly American academics, put it in 2009, the automatic conversion of cocos would 'transform an undercapitalised or insolvent bank into a well-capitalised bank at no cost to taxpayers'. <br><br> At first, regulators were keen. In 2010 Mervyn King, then the governor of the Bank of England, said he wanted contingent capital to be a 'major part of the liability structure of the banking system'. Swiss regulators, too, pushed for coco issuance. The hybrid nature of cocos seemed a way to satisfy both regulators, who wanted banks to have bigger safety buffers, and bankers, who were reluctant to issue new shares because of the high cost of capital. The hope was that investors, too, might see the appeal of an asset that offered a higher yield than bank bonds but lower risk than bank shares. <br><br> Nine years after the first cocos were issued by Lloyds Banking Group in Britain, they have not fulfilled this promise. To be sure, they are now an established asset class, with around $155bn of issuance in 2017 in Dollars, Euros and Pounds. But this is a fraction of more than $1trn in bank debt issued that year. Cocos are issued by only around 50 banks in a dozen countries mostly in Europe. Although cocos are held by the world's largest asset managers, including BlackRock and PIMCO, few specialise in them. Exceptions include niche funds run by Algebris Investment and Old Mutual Global Investors. <br><br> The main reason is that, despite early enthusiasm, regulators did not throw their weight behind cocos. In 2011, the Financial Stability Board, a global grouping of regulators, decided that they would not count towards the capital 'surcharge' the biggest banks would be required to hold. Only equity would do. Rules on 'total loss absorption capacity' finalised in 2015 require banks to have liabilities that can take a haircut or be wiped out if they are liquidated or restructured. But a wide range of liabilities, from shares to subordinated and even senior debt, is included. Cocos became part of a spectrum of at-risk liabilities, rather than a neat, catch-all solution. <br><br> The result is that cocos are a specialised investment proposition. They still offer fairly high yields-currently 5.3% for dollar cocos and 3% for those in euros, according to indices compiled by Credit Suisse, a bank. And they offer a premium over junior debt. They have appealing technical characteristics, too. Unlike bonds with a fixed maturity, they are perpetual, but redeemable after five years. If not redeemed, their coupon resets with reference to the mid-swap rate, a widely used rate related to interbank lending rates. That offers some protection against inflation. In 2016 investor jitters caused a spike in coco yields. But since then, nerves have calmed and spreads have narrowed.
Refer to- 'Nine years after the first cocos were issued by Lloyds Banking Group in Britain, they have not fulfilled this promise.' What is meant by the author in the line above? <br> I. Cocos are not a reliable asset class. <br> II. Cocos form only a tiny fraction of the total bank debt issued. <br> III. Cocos do not seem to have made a big difference in the banking system.
Explanation: Refer to: <br><br> ... To be sure, they are now an established asset class, with around $155bn of issuance in 2017 in Dollars, Euros and Pounds. But this is a fraction of more than $1trn in bank debt issued that year. Cocos are issued by only around 50 banks in a dozen countries mostly in Europe.Although cocos are held by the world's largest asset managers, including BlackRock and PIMCO, few specialise in them. Exceptions include niche funds run by Algebris Investment and Old Mutual Global Investors. ... <br><br> As per the fragments, I is clearly incorrect. <br><br> II and III are both correct. Cocos have not been able to fulfill the promise as they lack popularity and have not been effective. <br><br> Hence, option C is correct.
Directions: Read the passage and answer the questions that follow: <br><br> During the financial crisis, Western governments poured hundreds of billions of dollars into their banks to avert collapse. The search for ways to avoid future bailouts started before the turmoil ended. One of the niftiest proposals was the 'contingent convertible' (coco) bond, which turns into equity when the ratio of a bank's equity to risk-weighted assets falls below a predetermined danger point (since set at a minimum of 5.125% for cocos, although it can be up to around 7%). The ambition was grand. As the Squam Lake Group, composed of mostly American academics, put it in 2009, the automatic conversion of cocos would 'transform an undercapitalised or insolvent bank into a well-capitalised bank at no cost to taxpayers'. <br><br> At first, regulators were keen. In 2010 Mervyn King, then the governor of the Bank of England, said he wanted contingent capital to be a 'major part of the liability structure of the banking system'. Swiss regulators, too, pushed for coco issuance. The hybrid nature of cocos seemed a way to satisfy both regulators, who wanted banks to have bigger safety buffers, and bankers, who were reluctant to issue new shares because of the high cost of capital. The hope was that investors, too, might see the appeal of an asset that offered a higher yield than bank bonds but lower risk than bank shares. <br><br> Nine years after the first cocos were issued by Lloyds Banking Group in Britain, they have not fulfilled this promise. To be sure, they are now an established asset class, with around $155bn of issuance in 2017 in Dollars, Euros and Pounds. But this is a fraction of more than $1trn in bank debt issued that year. Cocos are issued by only around 50 banks in a dozen countries mostly in Europe. Although cocos are held by the world's largest asset managers, including BlackRock and PIMCO, few specialise in them. Exceptions include niche funds run by Algebris Investment and Old Mutual Global Investors. <br><br> The main reason is that, despite early enthusiasm, regulators did not throw their weight behind cocos. In 2011, the Financial Stability Board, a global grouping of regulators, decided that they would not count towards the capital 'surcharge' the biggest banks would be required to hold. Only equity would do. Rules on 'total loss absorption capacity' finalised in 2015 require banks to have liabilities that can take a haircut or be wiped out if they are liquidated or restructured. But a wide range of liabilities, from shares to subordinated and even senior debt, is included. Cocos became part of a spectrum of at-risk liabilities, rather than a neat, catch-all solution. <br><br> The result is that cocos are a specialised investment proposition. They still offer fairly high yields-currently 5.3% for dollar cocos and 3% for those in euros, according to indices compiled by Credit Suisse, a bank. And they offer a premium over junior debt. They have appealing technical characteristics, too. Unlike bonds with a fixed maturity, they are perpetual, but redeemable after five years. If not redeemed, their coupon resets with reference to the mid-swap rate, a widely used rate related to interbank lending rates. That offers some protection against inflation. In 2016 investor jitters caused a spike in coco yields. But since then, nerves have calmed and spreads have narrowed.
As per the passage, why were cocos not popular despite the early enthusiasm? <br> I. Due to the danger emanating from them to financial stability across World's Central Banks. <br> II. Due to the lack of support from financial regulators. <br> III. They are too complicated to understand for retail investors.
Explanation: Refer to: <br><br> ... The main reason is that, despite early enthusiasm, regulators did not throw their weight behind cocos. In 2011, the Financial Stability Board, a global grouping of regulators, decided that they would not count towards the capital 'surcharge' the biggest banks would be required to hold. ... <br><br> II is correct as per the fragment highlighted above. <br><br> I and III have not been mentioned in the passage and are incorrect. <br><br> Hence, option B is correct.
One Prime for the website and the app, same login. Videos play in the app.
30 questions in 15 minutes, All India rank, streak and explanations. Free: play it here after logging in, or in the app.
Free, and no password to remember.
By continuing you agree to the terms and privacy policy. Prefer the app? Android · iPhone
