An Evolutionary Approach to Asset Allocation in Defined Contribution Pension Schemes

With the increasing popularity of defined contribution pension schemes, the related asset allocation problem has become more prominent. The usual portfolio asset allocation approach is far from being appropriate since the asset allocation problem faced by defined contribution pension schemes is fundamentally different. There have been many attempts to solve the problem analytically. However, most of these analytical solutions fail to incorporate real world constraints such as short selling restrictions for the sake of mathematical tractability. In this chapter, we present an evolutionary approach to the asset allocation problem in defined contribution pension schemes. In particular, we compare the simulation results from a genetic algorithm with the results from an analytical model, a simulated annealing algorithm, and two asset allocation strategies that are widely used in practice, namely the life cycle and threshold (funded status) strategies.

[1]  N. Metropolis,et al.  Equation of State Calculations by Fast Computing Machines , 1953, Resonance.

[2]  M. Statman,et al.  How Many Stocks Make a Diversified Portfolio? , 1987, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[3]  K. Dowd,et al.  Pensionmetrics: Stochastic pension plan design and value-at-risk during the accumulation phase , 2001 .

[4]  Hany A. Shawky,et al.  Optimal Number of Stock Holdings in Mutual Fund Portfolios Based on Market Performance , 2005 .

[5]  Steven Haberman,et al.  Optimal investment strategy for defined contribution pension schemes , 2001 .

[6]  Katarzyna Romaniuk The optimal asset allocation of the main types of pension funds: a unified framework , 2007 .

[7]  C. D. Gelatt,et al.  Optimization by Simulated Annealing , 1983, Science.

[8]  John L. Evans,et al.  DIVERSIFICATION AND THE REDUCTION OF DISPERSION: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS , 1968 .

[9]  Arnold F. Shapiro,et al.  The merging of neural networks, fuzzy logic, and genetic algorithms , 2002 .

[10]  Maurry Tamarkin,et al.  On Diversification Given Asymmetry in Returns , 1981 .

[11]  Steven Haberman,et al.  Optimal investment strategies and risk measures in defined contribution pension schemes , 2002 .

[12]  Lester Ingber,et al.  Simulated annealing: Practice versus theory , 1993 .

[13]  Philip A. Horvath,et al.  On The Direction of Preference for Moments of Higher Order Than The Variance , 1980 .

[14]  Ron Bird,et al.  Note-Naive Diversification and Portfolio Risk-A Note , 1986 .

[15]  Stephen Lee,et al.  The impact of portfolio size on the variability of the terminal wealth of real estate funds , 2002 .

[16]  Edwin J. Elton,et al.  Risk Reduction and Portfolio Size: An Analytical Solution , 1977 .

[17]  R. Thaler,et al.  Naive Diversification Strategies in Defined Contribution Saving Plans , 2001 .