Abstract

We explore two approaches (cohort versus hazard) to measure the probability of investment rate migrations of pension funds in Australia. We also develop validation procedures pertinent to each approach and find that the cohort method is more stable in its forecasts and reports a lesser migration probability to lower investment grades with minimal statistical significance. Conversely, the hazard approach reports a higher migration probability to lower investment grades with statistical significance. This finding has considerable consequences for fund managers as they seek to mitigate any downward trends in their investment appraisals, especially as the cohort approach is the industry’s preferred approach in calculating rating migrations. The fund manager has a choice to make regarding measuring probability investment rate migrations, one between: stability (cohort) or accuracy (hazard).

Share

COinS
 

To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.