The appropriateness of default investment options in defined contribution plans: Australian evidence

被引:21
|
作者
Basu, Anup K. [2 ]
Drew, Michael E. [1 ]
机构
[1] Griffith Univ, Griffith Business Sch, Nathan, Qld 4111, Australia
[2] Queensland Univ Technol, Sch Econ & Finance, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia
关键词
Defined contribution; Default option; Pensions; ASSET ALLOCATION; FRAMEWORK;
D O I
10.1016/j.pacfin.2010.02.001
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
For participants in defined contribution (DC) plans who refrain from exercising investment choice, plan contributions are invested following the default investment option of their respective plans. Since default investment options of different plans vary widely in terms of their benchmark asset allocation, the most important determinant of investment performance, participants enrolled in these options face significantly different wealth outcomes at retirement. This paper simulates the terminal wealth outcomes under different static asset allocation strategies to evaluate their relative appeal as default investment choice in DC plans. We find that strategies with low or moderate allocation to stocks are consistently outperformed in terms of upside potential of exceeding the participant's wealth accumulation target at retirement as well as downside risk of falling below that target outcome by aggressive strategies whose allocation to stocks approach 100%. The risk of extremely adverse wealth outcomes for plan participants also does not appear to be very sensitive to asset allocation. Our evidence suggests the appropriateness of strategies heavily tilted towards stocks to be nominated as default investment options in DC plans unless plan providers emphasize predictability of wealth outcomes over adequacy of retirement wealth. Crown Copyright (C) 2010 Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:290 / 305
页数:16
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Robust two-player differential investment game of defined contribution pension plans under multiple risks
    Zhang, Yumo
    Lind, Peter Pommergard
    Xiang, Hanqing
    [J]. SCANDINAVIAN ACTUARIAL JOURNAL, 2024,
  • [42] Default risk and equity returns: Australian evidence
    Gharghori, Philip
    Chan, Howard
    Faff, Robert
    [J]. PACIFIC-BASIN FINANCE JOURNAL, 2009, 17 (05) : 580 - 593
  • [43] The Case for Liquid Alternatives in Defined-Contribution Plans
    Kupperman, David
    Kilgallen, Scott
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ALTERNATIVE INVESTMENTS, 2015, 17 (03): : 59 - 66
  • [44] DOES THE RIGHT TO CHOOSE MATTER FOR DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PLANS?
    Wong, Kin Ming
    Tsang, Kwok Ping
    [J]. CONTEMPORARY ECONOMIC POLICY, 2017, 35 (02) : 278 - 291
  • [45] DEFINED CONTRIBUTION PENSION PLANS AND MUTUAL FUND FLOWS
    Sialm, Clemens
    Starks, Laura
    Zhang, Hanjiang
    [J]. JOURNAL OF INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, 2018, 16 (03): : 31 - 45
  • [46] Naive diversification strategies in defined contribution saving plans
    Benartzi, S
    Thaler, RH
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 2001, 91 (01): : 79 - 98
  • [47] Defined contribution plans: Some observations on the risks and rewards
    Healey, TJ
    [J]. RETIREMENT PROSPECTS IN A DEFINED CONTRIBUTION WORLD, 1997, : 109 - 112
  • [48] Defined Contribution Pension Plans: Sticky or Discerning Money?
    Sialm, Clemens
    Starks, Laura T.
    Zhang, Hanjiang
    [J]. JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 2015, 70 (02): : 805 - 838
  • [49] Do defined contribution plans create value for shareholders?*
    Chaudhry, Neeru
    Kattamuri, Rohit
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL REVIEW OF ECONOMICS & FINANCE, 2024, 91 : 616 - 633
  • [50] The Management of Defined Contribution Pension Plans in Local Government
    Chen, Gang
    Ebdon, Carol
    Kriz, Kenneth
    Laforge, Olivier
    [J]. PUBLIC BUDGETING AND FINANCE, 2013, 33 (03): : 75 - 95