An Out-of-Sample Analysis of Investment Guarantees for Equity-Linked Products
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper we analyze the risk underlying investment guarantees using 78 different econometric models: GARCH, regime-switching, mixtures, and combinations of these approaches. This extensive set of models is compared with returns observed during the financial crisis in an out-of-sample analysis, bringing a new perspective to the study of equity-linked insurance. We find that despite the very good fit of recent models, too few of them are capable of consistently generating low returns over long periods, which were in fact observed empirically during the financial crisis. Moreover, tail risk measures vary significantly across models, and this emphasizes the importance of model risk. Most insurance companies are now focusing on dynamically hedging their investment guarantees, and so we also investigate the robustness of the Black-Scholes delta hedging strategy. We find that hedging errors can be very large among the top fitting models, implying that model risk must be taken into consideration when hedging investment guarantees.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it