| 
  
   | 
  
	 | 
  CIM PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES | 
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| November 4, 2025 | 
 | 
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 
 Audio and Slides of talks
             | 
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|  
                   Wednesday, November 25, 
                    2009 
                 | 
              |
| 8:30-8:55 | REGISTRATION & BUFFET BREAKFAST | 
| 8:55-9:00 | OPENING REMARKS Prof. Edward Bierstone, University of Toronto & Director, Fields Institute Prof. Moshe A. Milevsky, Schulich School of Business, York University  | 
              
| 9:00-10:15 | KEYNOTE ADDRESS #1, PLUS Q&A Professor Eytan Sheshinski, Hebrew University & Princeton University Recent Innovations in Annuities  | 
              
| 10:15-10:30 | COFFEE BREAK | 
| 10:30-11:45 | KEYNOTE ADDRESS #2, PLUS Q&A Professor Michael Sheris, University of New South Wales Securitization, Structuring and Pricing of Longevity Risk  | 
              
| 11:45-12:30 | BUFFET LUNCH & NETWORKING OPPORTUNITY | 
| 12:30-1:15 | RESEARCH SEMINAR Professor Nabil Tahani, York University Targeting Retirement Odds: Better Approximations with Higher Sustainability  | 
              
| 1:15-2:30 |  
                   PH.D. AWARD WINNERS (30 MINUTE PRESENTATIONS) Kim Peijnenburg, Tilburg University  | 
              
| 2:30 | CLOSING REMARKS | 
Keynote Lecture #1, Prof. Eytan Sheshinski, Hebrew University
              Keynote Lecture #2, Prof. Michael Sherris, University of New South 
              Wales
Research Presentation #1, Prof. Nabil Tahani, York University
            
Prof. Michael Sherris, University of New South Wales
              Securitization, Structuring and Pricing of Longevity Risk 
Pricing and risk management for longevity risk has increasingly 
              become a major challenge for life insurers and pension funds around 
              the world. Risk transfer to financial markets, with their major 
              capacity for efficient risk pooling, is an area of significant development 
              for a successful longevity product market. The structuring and pricing 
              of longevity risk using modern securitization methods, common in 
              financial markets, has yet to be successfully implemented for longevity 
              risk management. There are many issues that remain unresolved in 
              order to ensure the successful development of a longevity risk market. 
              This paper considers the securitization of longevity risk focusing 
              on the structuring and pricing of a longevity bond using techniques 
              developed in the financial markets, particularly for mortgages and 
              credit risk. A model based on Australian mortality data and calibrated 
              to insurance risk linked market data is used to assess the structure 
              and market consistent pricing of a longevity bond. Age dependence 
              in the securitized risks is shown to be a critical factor in structuring 
              and pricing longevity linked securitizations. 
              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
              
Prof. Eytan Sheshinski, Hebrew University and Princeton 
              University
              Recent Innovations in Annuities
I shall focus my remarks on two explanations of the so-called "Annuity 
              Puzzle" and propose the creation of new financial instruments 
              that will make income annuities more attractive. (1.) The Illiquidity 
              of income annuities due to the lack of residual (or secondary) markets 
              is a major reason for the reluctance to purchase annuities. I will 
              propose a new type of "Guaranteed Annuities", equivalent 
              to annuity options, which enable resale at predetermined prices. 
              (2.) Out of pocket health expenditures are increasingly a problem 
              for the elderly. We propose a new type of "Life Care Annuities" 
              which have flexible rules to convert retirement benefits to cover 
              medical expenses when needed. I shall also identify the self-selection 
              of individuals who purchase annuities with a bequest option and 
              those who purchase regular annuities, making the connection to life 
              insurance.
              ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
              
            
Prof. Nabil Tahani, York University
              Targeting Retirement Odds: Better Approximations with Higher 
              Sustainability
              
              This talk will consist of two parts. The first part discusses and 
              then extends the literature on the sustainability of retirement 
              income by making consumption a stochastic variable instead of a 
              constant real value, as previous papers have done. Using different 
              lifestyle scenarios, I will show that the difference in shortfall 
              probabilities (a.k.a. risk of ruin) between the variable cases and 
              the fixed consumption case is significant. In general, an initial 
              consumption (or spending rate) of more than 4% of initial wealth 
              is not sustainable for any likely set of conditions. In the very 
              best case, an initial consumption rate of 6% is sustainable, but 
              this case will fit very few people. The second part of the talk 
              deals with the classic pre-retirement problem in which a client 
              is advised on how much to save each year to reach a specified goal 
              and how the investment assets should be allocated between fixed 
              income and equity. I will derive a stochastic model in which the 
              rate of return and the rate of increase of annual savings are both 
              variable and calculate the probability that a particular goal will 
              be achieved. I will illustrate the use and provide some numerical 
              results of the model with a realistic retirement planning scenario 
              and variations.
Luis Goncalves-Pinto
              PhD Candidate in Finance
              USC Marshall School of Business
              Title: How Does Illiquidity Affect Delegated Portfolio Choice?
              Abstract: 
              In a continuous-time dynamic portfolio choice framework, I study 
              the problem of an investor who exogenously decides to delegate the 
              administration of her savings to a risk-averse money manager who 
              trades multiple risky assets in a thin market. I consider a manager 
              who is rewarded for increasing the value of assets under management, 
              which is the product of both the manager's portfolio allocation 
              decisions, taken over the investment period, and the money flows 
              into and out of the fund, as a result of the portfolio performance 
              relative to an exogenous benchmark. The model proposed here shows 
              that, whenever the manager can substitute between more illiquid 
              and less illiquid risky assets, she is likely to choose to hold 
              an initial portfolio that is skewed toward more illiquid assets, 
              and to gradually shift toward less illiquid assets over the investment 
              period. The model further shows that, several misalignments of objectives 
              between the investor and the manager can lead to large utility costs 
              on the part of the investor, and that these costs decrease with 
              asset illiquidity. Solving for the shadow costs of illiquidity, 
              the model indicates that delegated rather than direct investing 
              is likely to lead to larger price discounts.
              Full paper available here
Kim Peijnenburg
              Doctoral candidate
              Department of Econometrics and Operations Research
              Tilburg University
              Title: Optimal Annuitization with Background Risk and 
              Equity Exposure During Retirement 
              Abstract: 
              We examine optimal annuity demand and incorporate background risk 
              and incomplete annuity menus as possible drivers of deviations from 
              full annuitization. Contrary to what is often suggested in the literature, 
              we find that in these settings full annuitization remains close 
              to optimal. Whenever liquidity or equity exposure is desired, individuals 
              save sizeable amounts out of their annuity income to smooth shocks 
              due to background or inflation risk and/or to get equity exposure. 
              Similarly, adding variable annuities to the menu does not increase 
              welfare significantly, since individuals can save in order to get 
              the desired equity exposure.
              Full paper available here