MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2049404806 · doi:10.1002/fut.20438

Valuation of housing index derivatives

2009· article· en· W2049404806 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Futures Markets · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomicsValuation (finance)Futures contractEconometricsIndex (typography)Derivative (finance)Risk premiumActuarial scienceFinancial economicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This study analyzes the valuation of housing index derivatives traded on the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (CME). Specifically, to circumvent the nontradability of housing indices, we propose and implement an equilibrium valuation framework. Assuming a mean‐reverting aggregate dividend process and a utility function characterized by constant relative risk aversion, we show that the value of a housing index derivative depends only on parameters characterizing the underlying housing index, the endogenized interest rate and their correlation. We also analytically and numerically examine risk premiums for the CME futures and options and obtain three important findings. First, risk premiums are significant for all contracts with maturities longer than one year. Second, the expected growth rate of the underlying index is the key determinant for risk premiums. Third, risk premiums can be positive or negative, depending on whether the expected growth rate of the underlying index is higher or lower than the risk‐free yield‐to‐maturity. © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 30:660–688, 2010

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score0.262

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.218 · 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