Explanation
The no-arbitrage futures price for the stock is the current spot price plus the carrying cost for one year, which in this case is $100 * 10% =$10. Therefore the no-arbitrage futures price for the stock is $110.
($100*(1+10%), or $100 + $10.)

Explanation
All the statements are correct, therefore Choice 'd' is the correct answer. Let us look at each of these statements one by one.
I. A deep in-the-money call option has a value very close to that of a forward contract with a forward price equal to the exercise price. This is true because a deep in the money call option is most likely to be exercised, and is therefore effectively like a forward contract to buy the stock at the exercise price.
We can also look at this using the BSM formula for a call option. If c be the value of a call option, and all other variables have their usual meaning (S0 is the spot price, K is exercise price, and t is time to expiry), then according to the Black Scholes model the value of a call is given by the following expression:
202.22.e1
As S0 becomes large, d1 and d2 become large, and therefore N(d1) and N(d2) approach 1, leaving the value of the call to be equal to 202.22.e2, which is the formula for a forward contract.
II. If the volatility of a stock goes down to zero, the value of a call option on the stock will tend to be close to that of a forward contract so long as the option is in the money.
Again, this is true because if volatility is low or zero, the stock price will grow at its expected rate, and end up to be what the forward price is (S0 ert). If the option is out of the money, the value of the option will tend to 0.
III. All other things remaining the same, the issue of stock warrants exercisable at a future date will cause a decline in the current stock price.
This is true because the stock warrants are likely to be exercised only when they are in the money, ie when their exercise price is less than the going stock price, and at that time it will dilute the value of the existing shares. However, the reduction in the price is priced into the share price at the time of the issue of the warrants, and it is not that the share price falls the day they are exercised.
IV. Implied volatilities are calculated from market prices of options and are forward looking. This statement is true: historical volatilities calculated from past prices are backward looking, while 'implied volatility' is the volatility implied from market prices, and is forward looking as it encapsulates the market's view of how volatile the future is likely to be.

Explanation
The lowest achievable standard deviation will be lowest when the assets are perfectly negatively correlated, ie when correlation = -1. In the case of the above choices, the lowest correlation is -0.33, which is the correct choice.

Explanation
Statement I is true as standard deviation is the root of the squared deviations, and is always positive, and identical regardless of the positions being long or short.Statement II is false as the expected return of a long position is exactly the negative of the expected return of the short position.Statement III is correct as a correlation of +1 between two long positions implies a correlation of -1 between one long and one short position. This is the basis of hedging, for example, of spot positions with futures.Statement IV is inaccurate.
The weight of an asset in a portfolio does not change the correlation of the asset with the portfolio, or with other assets.Therefore Choice 'c' is the correct answer.

Explanation
A forward contract is a derivative contract, and has a delta of 1. Therefore Choice 'd' is the correct answer.
This is because the value of a forward contract is given by S - Ke^(-rt), where S is the current spot price, r the risk free rate, K the forward price, and t the time to maturity. As S changes from S to (S + S), the value changes to (S + S) - Ke^(-rt), ie the change in value is exactly S in response to a change in the price of the underlying by S. Therefore the forward contract has a delta of 1.
All other choices are incorrect.
Note that this is different from the delta of a futures contract which is different from 1, and equal to e^(rt), a number greater than 1.