Investments with Downside Insurance and the Issue of Time Diversification

Liang Zou

Financial Analysts Journal, 1997, vol. 53, issue 4, 73-79

Abstract: Of two insurance policies that guarantee the same minimum rate of return on a portfolio and differ only in their time horizons, which is riskier? This study shows that if the minimum rate is lower than the risk-free rate, and if the risk is measured by the cost of insurance, then the degree of risk is not a monotonic function of the policy's time horizon. For every positive level of concession rate—defined as the risk-free rate minus the insured rate—the cost of such insurance peaks at a finite time horizon. This peak cost horizon is typically between 5 and 15 years. The higher the concession rate (or the lower the volatility of the insured portfolio), the shorter this peak-cost time horizon is. Thus, although a 5-year insurance policy can be much riskier than a 1-year policy, it can also be riskier than a 30-year policy.

Date: 1997
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.2469/faj.v53.n4.2102 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:ufajxx:v:53:y:1997:i:4:p:73-79

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/ufaj20

DOI: 10.2469/faj.v53.n4.2102

Access Statistics for this article

Financial Analysts Journal is currently edited by Maryann Dupes

More articles in Financial Analysts Journal from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().