Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-sxzjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T22:38:58.262Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The value of tail risk hedging in defined contribution plans: what does history tell us*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 July 2014

ANUP K. BASU  and
MICHAEL E. DREW
ANUP K. BASU
Affiliation:
School of Economics and Finance, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD 4001, Australia (e-mail: a.basu@qut.edu.au)
MICHAEL E. DREW
Affiliation:
Griffith Business School, Griffith University, Nathan, QLD 4111, Australia (e-mail: michael.drew@griffith.edu.au)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Hedging against tail events in equity markets has been forcefully advocated in the aftermath of recent global financial crisis. Whether this is beneficial to long horizon investors like employees enrolled in defined contribution (DC) plans, however, has been subject to criticism. We conduct historical simulation since 1928 to examine the effectiveness of active and passive tail risk hedging using out of money put options for hypothetical equity portfolios of DC plan participants with 20 years to retirement. Our findings show that the cost of tail hedging exceeds the benefits for a majority of the plan participants during the sample period. However, for a significant number of simulations, hedging result in superior outcomes relative to an unhedged position. Active tail hedging is more effective when employees confront several panic-driven periods characterized by short and sharp market swings in the equity markets over the investment horizon. Passive hedging, on the other hand, proves beneficial when they encounter an extremely rare event like the Great Depression as equity markets go into deep and prolonged decline.

Keywords

tail riskactive hedgingoptionsmonetizationrisk management
Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Pension Economics & Finance , Volume 14 , Issue 3 , July 2015 , pp. 240 - 265
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2014 

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.)

Footnotes

*

The authors would like to gratefully acknowledge the support of Troy Rieck in writing this paper. The paper has benefitted from comments of two anonymous reviewers, Robert Swan, and the participants in the Griffith Academia-Industry Symposium. The authors thank Aditya Maheshwari, Phillip Turvey, and Osei Wiafe for providing excellent research assistance.

References

Badshah, I. (2009) Modelling the Dynamics of Implied Volatility Surface. SSRN working paper Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1347981 or doi: 10.2139/ssrn.1347981.Google Scholar
Bakshi, G. and Kapadia, N. (2003) Delta-hedged gains and the negative market volatility risk premium. Review of Financial Studies, 16: 527–566.Google Scholar
Basu, A. and Drew, M. (2009) Portfolio size effect in retirement accounts: what does it imply for lifecycle funds. Journal of Portfolio Management, 35: 61–72.Google Scholar
Beine, M., Cosma, A. and Vermeulen, R. (2010) The dark side of global integration: increasing tail dependence. Journal of Banking and Finance, 34: 184–192.Google Scholar
Bewley, R., Ingram, N., Libera, V. and. Thompson, S. (2007) Who's afraid of the big bad bear? or, why investing in equities is not scary and why investing without equities is scary. In Bateman, H. (ed), Retirement Provision in Scary Markets. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.Google Scholar
Bhansali, V. (2008) Tail risk management. Journal of Portfolio Management, 34: 68–75.Google Scholar
Bhansali, V. and Davis, J. (2010) Offensive risk management II: the case for active tail hedging. Journal of Portfolio Management, 37: 68–75.Google Scholar
Bondarenko, O. (2006) Market price of variance risk and performance of hedge funds. Meeting paper, American Finance Association.Google Scholar
Brière, M., Burgues, A. and Signori, O. (2010) Volatility exposure for strategic asset allocation. Journal of Portfolio Management, 36: 83–96.Google Scholar
Campbell, R., Koedijk, K. and Kofman, P. (2002) Increased correlation in bear markets. Financial Analysts Journal, 58: 87–94.Google Scholar
Cont, R. and Da Fonseca, J. (2002) Dynamics of implied volatility surfaces. Quantitative Finance, 2: 45–60.Google Scholar
Dash, S. and Moran, M. (2005) VIX as a companion for hedge fund portfolios. Journal of Alternative Investments, 8: 75–80.Google Scholar
Diagler, R. and Rossi, L. (2006) A portfolio of stocks and volatility. Journal of Investing, 15: 99–106.Google Scholar
Dimson, E., Marsh, P. and Staunton, M. (2002) Triumph of the Optimists: 101 Years of Global Investment Returns. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Egloff, D., Leippold, M. and Wu, L. (2010) The term structure of variance swap rates and optimal variance swap investments. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 45: 1279–1310.Google Scholar
Fengler, M., Härdle, W. and Mammen, E. (2007) A semiparametric factor model for implied volatility surface dynamics. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 5: 189–218.Google Scholar
Glosten, L., Jagannathan, R. and Runkle, D. (1993) On the relation between expected value and the volatility of the nominal excess return of stocks. Journal of Finance, 48: 1779–1801.Google Scholar
Gregory, K. (2008) SPX realized volatility at highest level since 1929. Goldman Sachs U.S. Options Research: Considering all options, November 21: 1–9.Google Scholar
Haugen, R., Talmor, E. and Tourus, W. (1991) The effect of volatility changes on the level of stock prices and subsequent expected returns. Journal of Finance, 46: 985–1007.Google Scholar
Hill, J. (2009) A perspective on liquidity risk and horizon uncertainty. Journal of Portfolio Management, 35: 60–68.Google Scholar
Ilmanen, A. (2012) Do financial markets reward buying and selling insurance and lottery tickets? Financial Analysts Journal, 68: 26–36.Google Scholar
Litterman, R. (2011) Who should hedge tail risk? Financial Analysts Journal, 67: 6–11.Google Scholar
Merville, L. and Pieptea, D. (1989) Stock-price volatility, mean-reverting diffusion, and noise. Journal of Financial Economics, 24: 193–214.Google Scholar
Seligman, J. and Wenger, J. (2006) Asynchronous risk: retirement savings, equity markets, and unemployment. Journal of Pension Economics and Finance, 5: 237–255.Google Scholar
Simonian, J. (2011) Mind the tails! Anticipatory risk management for target-date strategies. Journal of Risk, 13: 45–54.Google Scholar
Skiadopoulos, G., Hodges, S. and Clewlow, L. (1999) The dynamics of the S&P 500 implied volatility surface. Review of Derivatives Research, 3: 263–282.Google Scholar
Turner, C., Starz, R. and Nelson, C. (1989) ‘A market model of heteroskedasticity, risk, and learning in the stock market. Journal of Financial Economics, 25: 3–22.Google Scholar
Viceira, L. (2008) Life-cycle funds. In Lusardi, A. (ed), Overcoming the Saving Slump: How to Increase the Effectiveness of Financial Education and Saving Programs. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Warshawsky, M. (2011) Corporate defined benefit pension plans and the financial crisis: impacts, and sponsor and government reactions. Pension Research Council Working Paper, No. PRC WP2011–14.Google Scholar