MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081128723 · doi:10.1002/ijfe.2205

The impact of the yield curve on the equity returns of insurance companies

2020· article· en· W3081128723 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert N. Killins, Haiwei Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Finance & Economics · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicInsurance and Financial Risk Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsYield curveEconomicsEquity (law)Yield (engineering)Financial economicsDebtShareholderInterest rateMonetary economicsEconometricsFinanceCorporate governance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The past two decades have provided an interest rate environment that has generally been in decline, with current short‐term rates near zero in most financial markets around the world. This environment puts pressure on insurance firms who generally rely on debt markets to provide returns to fund their future financial obligations and to produce profits for their shareholders. This study examines the impact that the yield curve has on equity returns of Canadian and U.S. insurance companies during the past two decades. Using various measures of the yield curve, U.S. insurers' equity returns tend to have a negative relationship with the yield curve. In the Canadian sample, although the yield curve coefficients are negative and thus directionally align with the U.S. results, there is little statistical significance. Finally, there is additional support for the information diffusion hypothesis and asymmetric impacts of the yield curve on insurers' equity returns.

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)0.028
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.156
Threshold uncertainty score0.311

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.028
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Finance & EconomicsSame topicInsurance and Financial Risk ManagementFrench-language works237,207