Advertisement

Modeling the Ruin Probability of a Non-state Pension Fund Taking into Account Risky Investments

  • O. N. YarkovaEmail author
  • A. G. Renner
Conference paper
Part of the Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies book series (SIST, volume 138)

Abstract

The issues of financial sustainability of non-state pension Funds, which is understood as sufficiency of assets for fulfilling obligations to clients, are of great importance in the modern economy both for participants of pension programs and management of financial organization. Actuarial risks and investment policy of an organization have a significant impact on the solvency of the pension fund. The paper presents a simulation model for assessing the financial resources dynamics of a non-state pension Fund investing in risky and risk-free assets. Approbation of the model is performed on the example of two pension schemes operating in Russia: mandatory pension insurance, non-state pension insurance. The model allows estimating the financial resources of a non-state pension Fund in dynamics, collecting descriptive statistics of financial resources distributions, assessing the financial and actuarial risks of an organization. The author suggests an approach to assessing the ruin probability of a non-state pension Fund considering risky investments over a finite time. An impact analysis of the risk process characteristics of pension fund on the ruin probability is carried out.

Keywords

Non-state pension Funds Ruin probability Risky investments Financial sustainability Financial resources in dynamics 

References

  1. 1.
    Cairns, A.: Some notes on the dynamics and optimal control of stochastic pension fund models in continuous time. ASTIN Bull. 30(1), 19–55 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Deelstra, G., Grasselli, M., Koehl, P.F.: Optimal investment strategies in a CIR framework. J. Appl. Probab. 37, 1–12 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Menoncin, F.: Optimal portfolio and back ground risk: an exact and an approximated solution. Insur.: Math. Econ. 31, 249–265 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Merton, R.C.: Optimal consumption and portfolio rules in a continuous-time model. J. Econ. Theory 3, 373–413 (1971)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blake, D.: Pension schemes as options on pension fund assets: implications for pension fund management. Insur.: Math. Econ. 23, 263–286 (1998)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Keel, A., Muller, H.H.: Efficient portfolios in the asset liability context. ASTIN Bull. 25, 33–48 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wilkie, A.D.: Portfolio selection in the presence of fixed liabilities. J. Inst. Actuar. 112, 229–277 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wise, A.: The matching of assets to liabilities. J. Inst. Actuar. 111, 445–501 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Boulier, J.F., Huang, S.J., Taillard, G.: Optimal management under stochastic interest. Insur.: Math. Econ. 28, 173–189 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Haberman, S., Sung, J.H.: Dynamic approaches to pension funding. Insur.: Math. Econ. 15, 151–162 (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Alonso-García, J., Devolder, P.: Optimal mix between pay-as-you-go and funding in a multi-generational overlapping generations model. ASTIN Bull. J. IAA 45(3), 551–575 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Breyer, F.: On the intergenerational pareto efficiency of pay-as-you-go financed pension systems. J. Inst. Theor. Econ. 145, 643–658 (1989)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Fenge, R.: Pareto-efficiency of the pay-as-you-go pension system with intergenerational fairness. Finanzarchiv N. F. 52, 357–363 (1995)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Van Praag, B., Cardoso, P.: The mix between pay-as-you-go and funded pensions and what demography has to do with it. CESifo Working Paper, no 865 (2003)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Asch, B., Haider, S.J., Zissimopoulos, J.: Financial incentives and retirement: evidence from federal civil service workers. J. Public Econ. 89, 427–440 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Haberman, S., Vigna, E.: Optimal investment strategy for defined contribution pension schemes. Insur.: Math. Econ. 28, 233–262 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Piekkola, H., Deschryvere, M.: Retirement decisions and option values: their application regarding Finland, Belgium and Germany. The Research Institute of the Finnish Economy Discussion Paper 951, Helsinki, Finland (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    MacDonald, B.J., Cairns, A.J.G.: Three retirement decision models for defined contribution pension plan members: a simulation study. Insur.: Math. Econ. 48(1), 1–18 (2011)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cairns, A.J.G.: Some notes on the dynamics and optimal control of stochastic pension fund models in continuous time. Astin Bull. 30, 19–55 (2000)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Josa-Fombellida, R., Rincón-Zapatero, J.P.: Minimization of risks in pension funding by means of contribution and portfolio selection. Insur.: Math. Econ. 29, 35–45 (2001)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dufresne, D.: Moments of pension fund contributions and fund levels when rates of return are random. J. Inst. Actuar. 115, 535–544 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bédard, D., Dufresne, D.: Pension funding with moving average rates of return. Scand. Actuar. J. 101, 1–17 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Haberman, S., Wong, L.Y.P.: Moving average rates of return and the variability of pension contributions and fund levels for a defined benefits pension scheme. Insur.: Math. Econ. 20, 115–135 (1997)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Devolder, P., Bosch, P.M., Dominguez, F.I.: Stochastic optimal control of annuity contracts. Insur.: Math. Econ. 33(2), 227–238 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hainaut, D., Devolder, P.: Management of a pension fund under mortality and financial risks. Insur.: Math. Econ. 41(1), 134–155 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Daykin, C.D., Pentikäinen, T., Pesonen, M.: Practical Risk Theory for Actuaries. Monographs on Statistics and Applied Probability, vol. 53, 546 p. Chapman & Hall, London (1993)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sholomitsky A.: Pension plan risks and efficiency: a modeling approach. Working Paper WP2/2005/04. State University — Higher School of Economics, Moscow, 64 p. (2005)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Yarkova, O.N., Renner, A.G., Buresh, A.I.: Modeling Investment Portfolio of the Insurance Company in Statics and Dynamics. SamNC RAN Publication, Samara (2014)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Melnikov, A.V.: Risk Management: Stochastic Analysis of Risks Economy of Finance and Insurance. Moscow, 112 p. (2001)Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Kiriyanov, B.F.: Development and improvement of stochastic modeling methods. Bull. Novgorod State Univ. 19, 108–115 (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Orenburg State UniversityOrenburgRussia

Personalised recommendations