Dynamic hedging in incomplete markets using risk measures
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, we consider the pricing of financial derivatives that involve dynamic hedging strategies and payments within the planning horizon. Equity-indexed annuities (EIAs), guaranteed investment certificates (GICs) and American and barrier options are typical examples of these products. Our exploration involves the use and comparison of alternative models that use risk measures. Although the hedging is done for each observation of the input stochastic process, the appropriate mix of risk measures and state dynamic equations helps the issuer to appropriately tailor the overall risk exercise. These different models are solved by a unified backward stochastic dynamic programming framework that we imbed with parametric techniques to shorten the running time and manage the curse of dimensionality in dynamic programming. To demonstrate the flexibility of this framework we present numerical examples featuring GICs and point-to-point EIAs. Finally, by using sampling techniques, optimal hedging strategies and specific indicators of the hedging performance, we make recommendations on how to fine tune the risk measure parameters.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it