The effect of modelling parameters on the value of GMWB guarantees
In this article, an extensive study of the no-arbitrage fee for Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit (GMWB) variable annuity riders is carried out. The value of the GMWB guarantee increases substantially when taking into account the separation of mutual fund fees and the fees earmarked for hedging the guarantee. In addition, the fee is also adversely affected if the underlying risky asset follows a jump diffusion process. We also explore the effects of various modelling assumptions on the optimal withdrawal strategy of the contract holder, as well as the impact on the guarantee value of sub-optimal withdrawal behaviour. Our general conclusions are that only if several unrealistic modelling assumptions are made is it possible to obtain GMWB fees in the same range as is normally charged. In all other cases, it would appear that typical fees are not enough to cover the cost of hedging these guarantees.
If 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
References listed on IDEAS
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.:
- Leif Andersen & Jesper Andreasen, 2000. "Jump-Diffusion Processes: Volatility Smile Fitting and Numerical Methods for Option Pricing," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 4(3), pages 231-262, October.
- Min Dai & Yue Kuen Kwok & Jianping Zong, 2008. "Guaranteed Minimum Withdrawal Benefit In Variable Annuities," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(4), pages 595-611.
- C. He & J. Kennedy & T. Coleman & P. Forsyth & Y. Li & K. Vetzal, 2006. "Calibration and hedging under jump diffusion," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 1-35, January.
- Windcliff, H. & Forsyth, P. A. & Vetzal, K. R., 2001. "Valuation of segregated funds: shout options with maturity extensions," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 29(1), pages 1-21, August.
- Milevsky, Moshe A. & Salisbury, Thomas S., 2006. "Financial valuation of guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 21-38, February.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:insuma:v:43:y:2008:i:1:p:165-173. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Zhang, Lei)
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link to it, you can help with this form.
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.