Pension benefit security: a comparison of solvency requirements, a pension guarantee fund and sponsor support
AbstractDeveloped countries apply different security mechanisms in regulation to protect defined pension benefits: solvency requirements, a pension guarantee fund, and sponsor support. We test the performance of these mechanisms in terms of the protection offered to pension benefits in relation to the costs. For this, we calculate the expected log-return for the beneficiaries and the shortfall probability, i.e. the likelihood of the pension payment falling below the promised level. We show that it is possible to compare different pension security mechanisms using appropriate finance tools. Compared to a system based on solvency requirements alone, support by a pension guarantee fund or by the sponsor offers better downside protection for pension funds pursuing an aggressive investment policy. However, this comes at an additional cost. Beneficiaries of pension funds with conservative investment policies are better off under solvency requirements.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department in its series DNB Working Papers with number 268.
Date of creation: Dec 2010
Date of revision:
Pension plans; regulation; barrier options; rainbow barrier options; guarantee systems;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
- G23 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Non-bank Financial Institutions; Financial Instruments; Institutional Investors
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Alan J. Marcus, 1983.
"Corporate Pension Policy and the Value of PBGC Insurance,"
NBER Working Papers
1217, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Alan Marcus, 1987. "Corporate Pension Policy and the Value of PBGC Insurance," NBER Chapters, in: Issues in Pension Economics, pages 49-80 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Zvi Bodie & John B. Shoven & David A. Wise, 1987. "Issues in Pension Economics," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number bodi87-1, October.
- Dirk Broeders & An Chen & Birgit Koos, 2014. "Utility-equivalence of pension security mechanisms," DNB Working Papers 414, Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Rob Vet).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.