Abstract:How much should a family save for retirement and for the kids' college education? How much insurance should they buy? How should they allocate their portfolio across different assets? What should a company choose as the default asset allocation for a mandatory retirement saving plan? We believe that the life-cycle model developed by economists over the last fifty years provides guidance for making such decisions. The theory teaches us to view financial assets as vehicles for transferring resources across different times and outcomes over the life cycle, and that perspective allows households and planners to think about their decisions in a logical and rigorous way. This paper lays out and illustrates the basic analytical framework from the theory in nonmathematical terms, with the aim of providing guidance to financial service providers, consumers, and policymakers.

This paper explores the application of contingent claims analysis (CCA) to two "hot" issues in life-cycle finance: (1) investing for retirement and (2) deciding when, if ever, to switch careers.Participants in individual retirement accounts do not have the time or the knowledge to make their own investment decisions. Today they are defaulted into life-cycle mutual funds that pass all risk directly through to the participant. We use CCA to demonstrate how financial firms can design and produce guaranteed contingent benefit contracts that improve participant welfare at no additional cost to the system. In exploring the career-choice issue in the second part of the paper, we use CCA in a somewhat different way. The decision to switch careers is analogous to deciding when to exercise an American-style option to swap one asset for another. By applying the methods used to analyze the option-exercise decision to the career-switching problem, we gain some new insights beyond those derived from the traditional dynamic programming approaches.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract