MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3088535014 · doi:10.1108/jdqs-01-2002-b0005

The Impact of Default Correlations on the Prices of Collateralized Bond Obligat

2002· article· en· W3088535014 on OpenAlexaff
In Joon Kim, Suk Joon Byun, Yuen Jung Park

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Derivatives and Quantitative Studies 선물연구 · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCredit Risk and Financial Regulations
Canadian institutionsKootenay Association for Science & Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCollateralized debt obligationBondUnobservableEconometricsEconomicsVolatility (finance)Value (mathematics)Bond valuationFinancial economicsMathematicsStatisticsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a numerical procedure for pricing collateralized bond obligations (CBO) and analyze the impact of default correlations for the prices of collateralized bond obligations. Specifically, we adopt default correlation model of Zhou (2001) and first passage time model of Black and Cox (1976). The model of Black and Cox is used for estimating the value of the firm and the volatility of the firm value which are unobservable variables. We find that the impact of default correlations on the prices of collateralized bond obligations is generally quite large. This can be tested by carrying out Monte-Carlo simulations for firm value processes, assuming first no default correlations and second modeling default correlations between the processes. We also compare the model prices and recently issued CBO market price and find that no default correlation model over prices the issued CBO and default correlation model under prices the issued CBO. These results in this paper emphasize that modeling default correlations is very important in analyzing CBO and a more complicated further analysis is required.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.252

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.121
GPT teacher head0.332
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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Derivatives and Quantitative Studies 선물연구Same topicCredit Risk and Financial RegulationsFrench-language works237,207