Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Videos
  • Submit an article
  • More
    • About JOR
    • Editorial Board
    • Published Ahead of Print (PAP)
  • IPR Logo
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publish
  • Advertise
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • More
    • Awards
    • Article Licensing
    • Academic Use
  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

User menu

  • Sample our Content
  • Request a Demo
  • Log in

Search

  • ADVANCED SEARCH: Discover more content by journal, author or time frame
The Journal of Retirement
  • IPR Logo
  • About Us
  • Journals
  • Publish
  • Advertise
  • Videos
  • Webinars
  • More
    • Awards
    • Article Licensing
    • Academic Use
  • Sample our Content
  • Request a Demo
  • Log in
The Journal of Retirement

The Journal of Retirement

ADVANCED SEARCH: Discover more content by journal, author or time frame

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Past Issues
  • Videos
  • Submit an article
  • More
    • About JOR
    • Editorial Board
    • Published Ahead of Print (PAP)
  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter
Article
Open Access

Editor’s Letter

Brett Hammond
The Journal of Retirement Summer 2019, 7 (1) 1-2; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3905/jor.2019.7.1.001
Brett Hammond
Editor
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

In recent editor’s letters, I encouraged contributions to the journal that might form the basis for future topic-oriented issues. One of those topics is gender and race, on the grounds that much of what we read about retirement evaluates the aggregate, which is still well-represented by the older, male, white workforce of the past. We have seen research on the circumstances and behavior of women and a smaller amount on minorities, but we need additional insights and implications. I also continue to encourage articles on income/wealth on the grounds that we tend to focus on the middle to high end of the income/wealth spectrum and we need additional insights about lower-income and wealthy individuals. For example, new state-level pension plans and proposed US pension legislation would expand pension coverage for more current workers.

Of course, pension design is always a topic of compelling interest to the journal’s readers. In this issue, you will find four articles that directly address aspects of pension design and two that focus on issues—the use of active mutual funds and modeling mortality—that can affect it. Marion Laboure and Juergen Braunstein, in “A Migrant Flow Pension Model for Small Open Economies,” place pension design decisions in the context of a country’s macro forces. They develop a model that forecasts pension cohorts for an aging native population, cross-border workers, and migrants using three macro scenarios for the case of Switzerland. This kind of approach is applicable to pension planning in any country, large or small, with relatively open borders, changing demographics, and future macroeconomic uncertainty.

Three other articles focus on pension design as it relates to asset allocation. One of the most pressing themes running through practitioner research is how to improve how we characterize risk for purposes of portfolio allocation in both accumulation and decumulation. Thanks to Markowitz, the tradeoff between risk (sigma) and return (mu) has long taken center stage in portfolio selection, but we know that individuals legitimately see risk, not just as volatility, but also other dimensions associated with income shortfall, asset loss, inflation, and longevity, to name a few. In their article, “Shortfall Risk and Shortfall Duration for Portfolio Choice in Decumulation,” Ganlin Xu, Harry Markowitz, and John B. Guerard, Jr. advance our understanding of the portfolio allocation problem by looking at the effects of shortfall risk versus shortfall duration on allocations. Based on differences among retirees in habit formation, they conclude that a retiree who is unable to adjust to a change in spending should choose a portfolio that reduces the risk of a shortfall while the retiree who can more easily adjust spending should choose a portfolio that reduces the duration of a shortfall.

Like Xu, Markowitz, and Guerard, Javier Estrada and Mark Kritzman are interested in improving asset allocation for retirees. In “Toward Determining the Optimal Investment Strategy for Retirement,” they show that the sustainable spending “failure rate”—the most common metric used to evaluate post-retirement consumption—itself fails to account for strategies that fail early versus those that fail later in retirement. They propose instead the “coverage ratio,” which takes into account the differential utility associated with time of failure, to determine the optimal allocation to stocks and bonds using both historical and simulated returns. Similarly, Michael W. Crook, in “Liabilities Matter: Improving Target Date Glidepath Construction through Liability Adaptive Asset Allocations,” takes on the widely used human-capital-based utility approach to designing asset allocation glidepaths. While intuitively attractive, human capital does not necessarily behave in practice as it does in theory (e.g., it is assumed to be at its maximum on the first day of an individual’s career and then declines smoothly to zero at the point of retirement). Instead, a utility approach that accounts for projected future retirement liabilities improves outcomes and the ability to better customize portfolios for groups and individuals.

While not directly focused on pension design asset allocation, active versus passive fund selection has become a hot topic due to defined contribution plan sponsor concerns about fiduciary responsibility and the possibility of legal action. While no actual legal or regulatory decision prevents the use of active funds, many have assumed that passive fund expenses and benchmark-oriented performance are more easily defended. While acknowledging the well-known finding that the average active fund trails its comparable passive peers, Atanu Saha and Heather Roberts, in “Are Actively Managed Mutual Funds Per Se Imprudent Choices for 401(k) Plans?” show that simple screens, such as expense ratio, turnover, and Sharpe Ratio, can be used to significantly improve the odds of identifying actively managed mutual funds that do outperform. This is consistent with a large academic literature that identifies fund, fund manager, and fund family characteristics that are associated with persistent superior active management.

Finally, this issue contains an article addressing the challenge of modeling mortality to support pension design in those developing countries where a lack of historical data inhibits mortality projections. Samuel E. Assabil and Don L. Mcleish, in “Mortality Modeling Using Covariates with Ghana Census Data,” develop a model that takes into account the effects of healthcare, religion, reporting rates, and other factors that can affect current mortality estimates in one country, Ghana. They then borrow mortality data from neighboring South Africa to forecast Ghanian mortality changes and show that a similar approach can be used to improve forecasts in other developing countries.

Brett Hammond

Editor

  • © 2019 Pageant Media Ltd

PreviousNext
Back to top

Explore our content to discover more relevant research

  • By topic
  • Across journals
  • From the experts
  • Monthly highlights
  • Special collections

In this issue

The Journal of Retirement: 7 (1)
The Journal of Retirement
Vol. 7, Issue 1
Summer 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Complete Issue (PDF)
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on The Journal of Retirement.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Editor’s Letter
(Your Name) has sent you a message from The Journal of Retirement
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the The Journal of Retirement web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Editor’s Letter
Brett Hammond
The Journal of Retirement Jul 2019, 7 (1) 1-2; DOI: 10.3905/jor.2019.7.1.001

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Save To My Folders
Share
Editor’s Letter
Brett Hammond
The Journal of Retirement Jul 2019, 7 (1) 1-2; DOI: 10.3905/jor.2019.7.1.001
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
Tweet Widget Facebook Like LinkedIn logo

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Similar Articles

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Editor’s Letter
  • BOOK REVIEW: Is There a Retirement Crisis? An Exploration of the Current Debate
  • Editor’s Letter
Show more Article
LONDON
One London Wall, London, EC2Y 5EA
United Kingdom
+44 207 139 1600
 
NEW YORK
41 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10010
USA
+1 646 931 9045
pm-research@pageantmedia.com
 

Stay Connected

  • Follow IIJ on LinkedIn
  • Follow IIJ on Twitter

MORE FROM PMR

  • Home
  • Awards
  • Investment Guides
  • Videos
  • About PMR

INFORMATION FOR

  • Academics
  • Agents
  • Authors
  • Content Usage Terms

GET INVOLVED

  • Advertise
  • Publish
  • Article Licensing
  • Contact Us
  • Subscribe Now
  • Log In
  • Update your profile
  • Give us your feedback

© 2021 Pageant Media Ltd | All Rights Reserved | ISSN: 2326-6899 | E-ISSN: 2326-6902

  • Site Map
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Cookies
  • Privacy Policy