Hostname: page-component-84c44f86f4-5z4b6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-15T05:06:11.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The optimal cyclical design for a target benefit pension plan

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 July 2022

Lv Chen ,
Danping Li ,
Yumin Wang  and
Xiaobai Zhu
Lv Chen
Affiliation:
Academy of Statistics and Interdisciplinary Sciences, KLATASDS-MOE, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China
Danping Li*
Affiliation:
School of Statistics, KLATASDS-MOE, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China
Yumin Wang
Affiliation:
Warren Centre for Actuarial Studies and Research, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Xiaobai Zhu
Affiliation:
Department of Insurance, Finance and Actuarial Science, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu, China
*
*Corresponding author. Email: dpli@fem.ecnu.edu.cn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we derive the optimal cyclical design of a target benefit (TB) pension plan that balances the sustainability and the benefit stability using the optimal control approach. The optimal design possesses a linear risk sharing structure with cyclical parameters. We observe that the optimal design should be pro-cyclical in the usual circumstances, but counter-cyclical when the pension plan is severely in deficit. We compare the TB plans with the defined benefit plans and conclude that a more aggressive investment strategy should be adopted for the TB plans. In the end, we provide a cautionary note on the optimal control approach in the study of the TB plans.

Keywords

Hamilton–Jacobi–Bellman equationoptimal cyclical designregime switching modeltarget benefit pension planJ32

Information

Type
Article
Information
Journal of Pension Economics & Finance , Volume 22 , Issue 3 , July 2023 , pp. 284 - 303
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Antolín, P and Stewart, F (2009) ‘Private pensions and policy responses to the financial and economic crisis.’ International Organization of Pension Supervisors Working Paper No.9.Google Scholar
Bégin, JF (2020) Levelling the playing field: a VIX-linked structure for funded pension schemes. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 94, 58–78.Google Scholar
Bovenberg, L and Mehlkopf, R (2014) Optimal design of funded pension schemes. Annual Review of Economics 6, 445–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerboni Baiardi, L, Costabile, M, De Giovanni, D, Lamantia, F, Leccadito, A, Massabó, I, Menzietti, M, Pirra, M, Russo, E and Staino, A (2020) The dynamics of the S&P 500 under a crisis context: insights from a three-regime switching model. Risks 8, 71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, A and Rach, M (2021) Current developments in German pension schemes: what are the benefits of the new target pension? European Actuarial Journal 11, 21–47.10.1007/s13385-020-00247-wCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, DH, Beetsma, RM, Broeders, DW and Pelsser, AA (2017) Sustainability of participation in collective pension schemes: an option pricing approach. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 74, 182–196.Google Scholar
Cooper, JR (2013) Are defined contribution pension plans fit for purpose in retirement. Seattle University Law Review 37, 511.Google Scholar
Cui, J, De Jong, F and Ponds, E (2011) Intergenerational risk sharing within funded pension schemes. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance 10, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Esteve, V, Navarro-Ibanez, M and Prats, MA (2020) Stock prices, dividends, and structural changes in the long-term: the case of US. The North American Journal of Economics and Finance 52, 101126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forsyth, PA and Vetzal, KR (2019) Optimal asset allocation for retirement saving: deterministic vs. Time consistent adaptive strategies. Applied Mathematical Finance 26, 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Franzen, D (2010) ‘Managing investment risk in defined benefit pension funds.’ OECD Working Papers on Insurance and Private Pensions No.38.Google Scholar
Gollier, C (2008) Intergenerational risk-sharing and risk-taking of a pension fund. Journal of Public Economics 92, 1463–1485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Graf, S (2017) Life-cycle funds: much ado about nothing? The European Journal of Finance 23, 974–998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greszler, R (2017) Not your grandfather's pension: why defined benefit pensions are failing. Heritage Foundation Backgrounder (3190), 2017–2005.Google Scholar
Haberman, S and Sung, JH (1994) Dynamic approaches to pension funding. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 15, 151–162.Google Scholar
Hamilton, JD (1989) A new approach to the economic analysis of nonstationary time series and the business cycle. Econometrica: Journal of the Econometric Society 57(2), 357–384.10.2307/1912559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hardy, M (2001) A regime-switching model of long-term stock returns. North American Actuarial Journal 5, 41–53.10.1080/10920277.2001.10595984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Josa-Fombellida, R and Rincón-Zapatero, JP (2001) Minimization of risks in pension funding by means of contributions and portfolio selection. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 29, 35–45.Google Scholar
Josa-Fombellida, R and Rincón-Zapatero, JP (2004) Optimal risk management in defined benefit stochastic pension funds. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 34, 489–503.Google Scholar
Khorasanee, ZM (2012) Risk-sharing and benefit smoothing in a hybrid pension plan. North American Actuarial Journal 16, 449–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ma, CM (2017a) An actuarial balance sheet approach to assessing sustainability of target benefit plans. Canadian Institute of Actuaries. Document, 217045.Google Scholar
Ma, CM (2017b) Report of the task force on target benefit plans. Canadian Institute of Actuaries. Document, 215043.Google Scholar
Ma, CM (2018) Selecting discount rates for assessing funded status of target benefit plans. Canadian Institute of Actuaries. Document, 218041.Google Scholar
Merton, R (1969) Life time portfolio selection under uncertainty: the continuous-time case. The Review of Economics and Statistics 51, 247–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sotomayor, LR and Cadenillas, A (2009) Explicit solutions of consumption-investment problems in financial markets with regime switching. Mathematical Finance 19, 251–279.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, S, Lu, Y and Sanders, B (2018) Optimal investment strategies and intergenerational risk sharing for target benefit pension plans. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 80, 1–14.Google Scholar
Wang, S, Rong, X and Zhao, H (2019) Optimal investment and benefit payment strategy under loss aversion for target benefit pension plans. Applied Mathematics and Computation 346, 205–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yermo, J and Severinson, C (2010) ‘The impact of the financial crisis on defined benefit plans and the need for counter-cyclical funding regulations.’ OECD Working Papers on Finance, Insurance and Private Pensions No.3.Google Scholar
Yuen, FL and Yang, H (2009) Option pricing in a jump-diffusion model with regime switching. ASTIN Bulletin 39, 515–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, H and Wang, S (2022) Optimal investment and benefit adjustment problem for a target benefit pension plan with Cobb-Douglas utility and Epstein-Zin recursive utility. European Journal of Operational Research 301, 1166–1180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Chen et al. supplementary material

Chen et al. supplementary material 1

Download Chen et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 75.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Chen et al. supplementary material

Chen et al. supplementary material 2

Download Chen et al. supplementary material(File)
File 35.7 KB