MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2078596241 · doi:10.1080/10920277.2013.773240

Pricing and Hedging Variable Annuity Guarantees with Multiasset Stochastic Investment Models

2013· article· en· W2078596241 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Cheuk-Yin Ng, Johnny Siu‐Hang Li

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Actuarial Journal · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Risk and Volatility Modeling
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnivariateAnnuityDownside riskEconometricsMultivariate statisticsVariable (mathematics)EconomicsActuarial scienceBasis riskInvestment strategyCapital asset pricing modelFinancial economicsLife annuityComputer scienceFinancePortfolioMathematicsMarket liquidity

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Variable annuities are often sold with guarantees to protect investors from downside investment risk. The majority of variable annuity guarantees are written on more than one asset, but in practice, single-asset (univariate) stochastic investment models are mostly used for pricing and hedging these guarantees. This practical shortcut may lead to problems such as basis risk. In this article, we contribute a multivariate framework for pricing and hedging variable annuity guarantees. We explain how to transform multivariate stochastic investment models into their risk-neutral counterparts, which can then be used for pricing purposes. We also demonstrate how dynamic hedging can be implemented in a multivariate framework and how the potential hedging error can be quantified by stochastic simulations.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations29
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Actuarial JournalSame topicFinancial Risk and Volatility ModelingFrench-language works237,207