Article2003

Reserving, Pricing and Hedging For Policies with Guaranteed Annuity Options

A. David Wilkie · Howard R. Waters · Stephen Yang

70 citations0/0 files storedBritish Actuarial Journal

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Stochastic processes and financial applications Insurance, Mortality, Demography, Risk Management Probability and Risk Models

Abstract

ABSTRACT In this paper we consider reserving and pricing methodologies for a pensions-type contract with a simple form of guaranteed annuity option. We consider only unit-linked contracts, but our methodologies and, to some extent, our numerical results would apply also to with-profits contracts. The Report of the Annuity Guarantees Working Party (Bolton et al., 1997), presented the results of a very interesting survey, as at the end of 1996, of life assurance companies offering guaranteed annuity options. There was no consensus at that time among the companies on how to reserve for such options. The Report discussed several approaches to reserving, but concluded that it was unable to recommend a single approach. This paper is an attempt to fill that gap. We investigate two approaches to reserving and pricing. In the first sections of the paper we consider quantile, and conditional tail expectation, reserves. The methodology we adopt here is very close to that proposed by the Maturity Guarantees Working Party in its Report to the profession (Ford et al., 1980). We show how these policies could have been reserved for in 1985, and what would have been the outcome of using the proposed method. In a later section we consider the feasibility of using option pricing methodology to dynamically hedge a guaranteed annuity option. It is shown that this is possible within the context of the model we propose, but we submit that, in practical terms, dynamic hedging is not a complete solution to the problem since suitable tradeable assets do not in practice exist. Finally, we describe several enhancements to our models and methodology, which would make them even more realistic, though generally they would have the effect of increasing the required contingency reserves

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 70 citations exist upstream.

References

1999Coherent Measures of Risk 1977An equilibrium characterization of the term structure 1992Bond Pricing and the Term Structure of Interest Rates: A New Methodology for Contingent Claims Valuation 1976The pricing of commodity contracts 1990Pricing Interest-Rate-Derivative Securities 1990Options, Futures, and Other Derivative Securities.1989An Exact Bond Option Formula 1976The pricing of equity-linked life insurance policies with an asset value guarantee

Cited by

2003Guaranteed Annuity Options 2004A FAMILY OF TERM‐STRUCTURE MODELS FOR LONG‐TERM RISK MANAGEMENT AND DERIVATIVE PRICING 2003Pricing and hedging guaranteed annuity options via static option replication 2009The Impact of Longevity Risk on the Optimal Contribution Rate and Asset Allocation for Defined Contribution Pension Plans 2015Mortality modelling with regime-switching for the valuation of a guaranteed annuity option

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.