Life-cycle funds: Much Ado about Nothing?

The core idea of life-cycle funds or target-date funds is to decrease the fund's equity exposure and conversely increase its bond exposure towards the fund's target date. Such funds have been gaining significant market share and were recently set as default choice of asset allocation in numerous defined contribution schemes or related old-age provision products in several countries. Hence, an assessment of life-cycle funds’ risk-return profiles – that is, the probability distribution of returns – is essential for sustainable financial planning of a large group of investors. This paper studies the risk-return profile of life-cycle funds in particular compared to simple balanced or lifestyle funds that apply a constant equity portion throughout the fund's term instead. In a Black–Scholes model, we derive balanced funds that reproduce the risk-return profile of an arbitrary life-cycle fund for single and regular contributions. We then analyze the accuracy of our results under more complex asset models with stochastic interest rates, stochastic equity volatility and jumps. We further show that frequently used ‘rule of thumb approximations’ that only take into account the life-cycle fund's average equity portion are not suitable to approximate a life-cycle fund's risk-return profile. Our results on the one hand facilitate sustainable financial planning and on the other hand challenge the very existence of life-cycle funds since appropriately calibrated balanced funds can offer a similar (often dominating) risk-return profile.     

Comparing Interpersonal Comparisons in Utility Theory and Happiness Research

Social scientists are reluctant to make explicit interpersonal comparisons of well-being. However, implicit comparisons are made on a surprisingly regular basis. These comparisons are based on the wealth and the Kaldor–Hicks concept in utility theory and on self-reported well-being in happiness research. Taking a utilitarian stance, this paper tests the ethical foundations of both principles. While self-reported well-being serves as an acceptable proxy for utilitarian decision-making, the Kaldor–Hicks concept does not appear so. Implications for evaluating policies are outlined.

Federalism and decentralization—a critical survey of frequently used indicators

The economic effects of federalism are unclear: some papers find that federalism has strong positive effects on a number of economically relevant variables, others find negative effects. The results often crucially hinge on the proxies for federalism used. In this paper, we critically survey the existing indicators for both federalism and fiscal decentralization. We argue that federalism is a constitutional institution, whereas decentralization is the outcome of a policy choice, and that the two ought to be systematically distinguished because decentralization can also occur in nonfederally structured states. We further argue that institutional details are very important with regard to federalism and that dummy variables usually capture only very specific aspects of these institutional details. We use factor analysis to test whether the latent variables behind the observed indicators support these assumptions. More than two important factors are derived, implying that a more fine-grained differentiation beyond simply “‘federalism” and “decentralization” might be in order. The correlations of the most important proxies for various aspects of federalism and decentralization with a number of quasi-exogenous variables, as well as with institutional variables, are usually rather modest.     

Leseliste Top 5: Beteiligungscontrolling

PRAXIS | Magazin

Leseliste Top 5: Beteiligungscontrolling     

ECB repo rate setting during the financial crisis

I estimate a reaction function for the ECB using an ordered logit model for the period 1999-2009. Allowing for a smooth transition from one set of parameters to another, I detect a rapid change in the middle of 2008.     

Hub location problems in transportation networks

In this paper we propose a 4-index formulation for the uncapacitated multiple allocation hub location problem tailored for urban transport and liner shipping network design. This formulation is very tight and most of the tractable instances for MIP solvers are optimally solvable at the root node. While the existing state-of-the-art MIP solvers fail to solve even small size instances of problem, our accelerated and efficient primal (Benders) decomposition solves larger ones. In addition, a very efficient greedy heuristic, proven to be capable of obtaining high quality solutions, is proposed. We also introduce fixed cost values for Australian Post (AP) dataset.