Refine
Year of publication
- 2015 (115) (remove)
Document Type
- Working Paper (108)
- Part of Periodical (6)
- Article (1)
Has Fulltext
- yes (115)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (115) (remove)
Keywords
- Währungsunion (4)
- systemic risk (4)
- Solvency II (3)
- insurance (3)
- Banking Union (2)
- Basel III (2)
- Fiscal Union (2)
- Fiskalunion (2)
- Heterogeneous Agents (2)
- Income and Wealth Inequality (2)
Institute
- Center for Financial Studies (CFS) (115) (remove)
SAFE Newsletter : 2015, Q2
(2015)
SAFE Newsletter : 2015, Q1
(2015)
SAFE Newsletter : 2015, Q3
(2015)
SAFE Newsletter : 2015, Q4
(2015)
This paper studies the life cycle consumption-investment-insurance problem of a family. The wage earner faces the risk of a health shock that significantly increases his probability of dying. The family can buy long-term life insurance that can only be revised at significant costs, which makes insurance decisions sticky. Furthermore, a revision is only possible as long as the insured person is healthy. A second important feature of our model is that the labor income of the wage earner is unspanned. We document that the combination of unspanned labor income and the stickiness of insurance decisions reduces the long-term insurance demand significantly. This is because an income shock induces the need to reduce the insurance coverage, since premia become less affordable. Since such a reduction is costly and families anticipate these potential costs, they buy less protection at all ages. In particular, young families stay away from long-term life insurance markets altogether. Our results are robust to adding short-term life insurance, annuities and health insurance.
We consider the continuous-time portfolio optimization problem of an investor with constant relative risk aversion who maximizes expected utility of terminal wealth. The risky asset follows a jump-diffusion model with a diffusion state variable. We propose an approximation method that replaces the jumps by a diffusion and solve the resulting problem analytically. Furthermore, we provide explicit bounds on the true optimal strategy and the relative wealth equivalent loss that do not rely on quantities known only in the true model. We apply our method to a calibrated affine model. Our findings are threefold: Jumps matter more, i.e. our approximation is less accurate, if (i) the expected jump size or (ii) the jump intensity is large. Fixing the average impact of jumps, we find that (iii) rare, but severe jumps matter more than frequent, but small jumps.