DYNAMIC HEDGING STRATEGIES FOR CASH BALANCE PENSION PLANS

Cash balance pension plans with crediting rates linked to long bond yields are relatively common in the United States, but their liabilities are proving very challenging to hedge. In this paper, we consider dynamic hedge strategies using the one-factor and two-factor Hull White models, based on results for the liability valuation from Hardy et al. (2014). The strategies utilise simple hedge portfolios combining one or two zero-coupon bonds, and a money market account. We assess the effectiveness of the strategies by considering how accurately each one would have hedged a 5-year cash balance liability through the past 20 years, using real-world returns and crediting rates, and assuming parameters calibrated using the information available at the time. We show that there is considerable impact of model and parameter uncertainty, with additional, less severe impact from discrete hedging error and transactions costs. Despite this, the dynamic hedge strategies do manage to stabilize surplus substantially, even through the turbulence of the past two decades.

Subjective value of the guarantees embedded in public cash-balance pension plans

Some public sectors provide cash-balance pension plans with guaranteed interest credits. We use the certainty-equivalence framework to derive the subjective value of the guarantee perceived by the participant. Numerical results show that in many scenarios the subjective value is lower than the cost of the guarantee derived by option pricing approaches, implying that public sectors potentially spend too much in providing the guarantee. However, the subjective value could be higher than the cost of the guarantee under some scenarios, depending on the participant's level of risk aversion, the feasibility of diversification, and so forth.

Are Cash Balance Pension Plans A Viable Retirement Program For Corporate America?

Cash Balance Pension Plans are a defined benefit plan where employees have a hypothetical account that increases annually, as a result of compensation credit as well as interest credit. In essence, cash balance pension plans combine elements of both a traditional defined benefit plan and a defined contribution plan (Lucas, 2007). This paper examines the recent trends and legal ruling regarding cash balance pension plans. The paper also provides an examination of the role of the Pension Protection Act (PPA) of 2006 and its impact on cash balance pension plans. An evaluation will also be presented to determine if cash balance pension plans are a viable retirement program option in corporate America.

Cash Balance Pension Plans: Good News or Bad News?

<span>Modification of defined benefit plans and conversion of defined contribution plans into Cash Balance Pension Plans (CBPs) has attracted a lot of attention recently. A comparison of the three plans and an examination of 10 companies reveal a significant financial incentive in favor of CBPs. The “good news” for a younger employee is level accrual of benefits and plan portability, and for stockholders, a smaller impact on net income. CBPs bear “bad news” for older and/or less mobile employees and the stockholders when the plan assets perform poorly. </span>

Adopting cash balance pension plans: implications and issues

Over the past 15 to 20 years, many companies have converted their traditional defined benefit plans to cash balance or pension equity plans. In a cash balance plan, the worker's ‘account’ is based on an annual contribution rate for each year of employment, plus accumulating interest on annual contributions. A pension equity plan defines the benefit as a percentage of final average earnings for each year of service under the plan. Both types of plans specify the benefit as a lump sum payable at termination. In contrast, traditional defined benefit plans specify benefits in terms of an annuity payable at retirement. From the employees' perspective, cash balance and pension equity plans look somewhat like defined contribution plans. However, they are funded, administered, and regulated as defined benefit plans.