MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393095114 · doi:10.1111/irfi.12447

The mean–variance (in)efficiency of duration‐based immunization

2024· article· en· W4393095114 on OpenAlex
Pascal François, Franck Moraux

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

VenueInternational Review of Finance · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicStochastic processes and financial applications
Canadian institutionsHEC Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEfficient frontierDuration (music)EconometricsVariance (accounting)Stylized factInefficiencyImmunizationDiscountingMathematicsSet (abstract data type)PortfolioGaussianEconomicsStatisticsComputer scienceMedicineMicroeconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Empirical studies report inconclusive assessment of duration‐based immunization, notably showing that more sophisticated strategies do not outperform immunization relying on Macaulay duration. This article provides a mean–variance framework to explain this puzzle. We characterize the efficient portfolio allocations for a stylized barbell strategy trading off reinvestment risk with discounting risk. We show, in a model‐free setting, that barbell allocations form a convex set in the mean–variance space, and the endpoints of the efficient frontier can switch as time passes, reversing the set of efficient allocations. Consequently, duration‐based immunization, which is not minimum variance, can exhibit temporary inefficiency. This result is numerically illustrated in a one‐factor Gaussian and a two‐factor non‐Gaussian model. Using yield curve scenarios resampled from U.S. data over the 1977–2020 period, we further corroborate our conclusions non‐parametrically, and find that duration‐based immunization is sometimes inefficient.

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)0.001
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.244

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · 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