养老基金风险:为什么LDI与低风险下滑路径的传统配对会产生较差的结果

Milla Krasnopolsky, M. Ashton
{"title":"养老基金风险:为什么LDI与低风险下滑路径的传统配对会产生较差的结果","authors":"Milla Krasnopolsky, M. Ashton","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2914659","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Combined use of traditional Liability Driven Investment (LDI) and funded status responsive de-risking strategies should be decoupled or rebuilt. Embedded inconsistencies in the treatment of risks in these two elements of what has become a popular pension strategy cause irreconcilable conflicts in their execution and imperils the positive pension fund outcome. \nThis article provides a critique of the combined LDI/de-risking Glide Path strategy as currently implemented by many pension plan managers and also provides an example of an alternative solution that better improves pension plan outcomes.","PeriodicalId":407792,"journal":{"name":"Pension Risk Management eJournal","volume":"135 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-02-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pension Fund Perils: Why Conventional Pairing of LDI with De-Risking Glide Paths Produces Inferior Outcomes\",\"authors\":\"Milla Krasnopolsky, M. Ashton\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2914659\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Combined use of traditional Liability Driven Investment (LDI) and funded status responsive de-risking strategies should be decoupled or rebuilt. Embedded inconsistencies in the treatment of risks in these two elements of what has become a popular pension strategy cause irreconcilable conflicts in their execution and imperils the positive pension fund outcome. \\nThis article provides a critique of the combined LDI/de-risking Glide Path strategy as currently implemented by many pension plan managers and also provides an example of an alternative solution that better improves pension plan outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":407792,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pension Risk Management eJournal\",\"volume\":\"135 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-02-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pension Risk Management eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2914659\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pension Risk Management eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2914659","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

应将传统的负债驱动投资(LDI)与资金状况响应型去风险策略相结合,进行解耦或重建。在这两个已成为流行的养老金战略要素的风险处理中,根深蒂固的不一致在其执行中造成不可调和的冲突,并危及积极的养老基金结果。本文对目前许多养老金计划管理者实施的LDI/去风险滑翔路径策略进行了批评,并提供了一个更好地改善养老金计划结果的替代解决方案的示例。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Pension Fund Perils: Why Conventional Pairing of LDI with De-Risking Glide Paths Produces Inferior Outcomes
Combined use of traditional Liability Driven Investment (LDI) and funded status responsive de-risking strategies should be decoupled or rebuilt. Embedded inconsistencies in the treatment of risks in these two elements of what has become a popular pension strategy cause irreconcilable conflicts in their execution and imperils the positive pension fund outcome. This article provides a critique of the combined LDI/de-risking Glide Path strategy as currently implemented by many pension plan managers and also provides an example of an alternative solution that better improves pension plan outcomes.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信