Robustly Hedging Variable Annuities With Guarantees Under Jump and Volatility Risks

T. F. Coleman, Young-Rae Kim, Y. Li and M. Patron

Journal of Risk & Insurance, 2007, vol. 74, issue 2, 347-376

Abstract: Recent variable annuities offer participation in the equity market and attractive protection against downside movements. Accurately quantifying this additional equity market risk and robustly hedging options embedded in the guarantees of variable annuities are new challenges for insurance companies. Due to sensitivities of the benefits to tails of the account value distribution, a simple Black–Scholes model is inadequate in preventing excessive liabilities. A model which realistically describes the real world price dynamics over a long time horizon is essential for the risk management of the variable annuities. In this article, both jump risk and volatility risk are considered for risk management of lookback options embedded in guarantees with a ratchet feature. We evaluate relative performances of delta hedging and dynamic discrete risk minimization hedging strategies. Using the underlying as the hedging instrument, we show that, under a Black–Scholes model, local risk minimization hedging can be significantly better than delta hedging. In addition, we compare risk minimization hedging using the underlying with that of using standard options. We demonstrate that, under a Merton's jump diffusion model, hedging using standard options is superior to hedging using the underlying in terms of the risk reduction. Finally, we consider a market model for volatility risks in which the at‐the‐money implied volatility is a state variable. We compute risk minimization hedging by modeling at‐the‐money Black–Scholes implied volatility explicitly; the hedging effectiveness is evaluated, however, under a joint model for the underlying price and implied volatility. Our computational results suggest that, when implied volatility risk is suitably modeled, risk minimization hedging using standard options, compared to hedging using the underlying, can potentially be more effective in risk reduction under both jump and volatility risks.

Date: 2007
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (27)

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1539-6975.2007.00216.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:jrinsu:v:74:y:2007:i:2:p:347-376

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.wiley.com/bw/subs.asp?ref=0022-4367

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Risk & Insurance is currently edited by Joan T. Schmit

More articles in Journal of Risk & Insurance from The American Risk and Insurance Association Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().