MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W16888790 · doi:10.1002/jmri.20682

Optimal Asset Allocation and The Real Option to Delay Annuitization: It’s Not Now-or-Never

2002· article· en· W16888790 on OpenAlexaff
Moshe A. Milevsky, Virginia R. Young

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLife annuityActuarial scienceEconomicsLife insuranceAsset allocationPresent valueAnnuityAsset (computer security)Moral hazardValue of lifeNormativePensionMicroeconomicsPortfolioFinancial economicsFinanceComputer scienceIncentive

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Asset allocation and consumption towards the end of the life cycle is complicated by the uncertainty associated with the length of life. Although this risk can be hedged with life annuities, empirical evidence suggests that voluntary annuitization amongst the public is not very common, nor is it well understood. This paper develops a normative model of when, and if, one should purchase an immediate life annuity. This problem is particularly relevant given the increasing number of Defined Contribution pension plans in the U.S – for which participants must make this decision – and the corresponding trend away from Defined Benefit guarantees. Specifically, our main qualitative argument is that there is a real option – akin to the corporate finance usage of the word – embedded in the decision to annuitize. A life annuity can be viewed as a project with a positive net present value. However, quite distinct from a fixed-income bond or period certain annuity, once purchased, a life annuity can never be sold, reversed, or exchanged. Its purchase is final because of the severe moral hazard involved in trying to terminate a life-contingent claim. We use standard continuous-time technology to solve the optimal asset allocation and annuitization timing problem. We then define the value of the real option to defer annuitization (RODA) as the compensating utility loss from being unable to behave optimally. By using reasonable capital market and actuarial parameters, we estimate that the real option to defer annuitization is quite valuable until the mid-70s or mid-80s. Of course, the precise values depend on one’s gender, risk aversion, and subjective health assessment. Finally, we show that low-cost variable immediate annuities, which are currently not widely available, greatly reduce the option value to wait and create substantial welfare gains. This might explain the large number of TIAA-CREF participants who rightfully choose to annuitize their DC pension plan, as a result of the availability of both fixed and variable payments in the payout stage. JEL Classification: J26; G11

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.214 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations58
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisFrench-language works237,207