JOURNAL ARTICLE
Cite JOURNAL ARTICLE
Style
Format
What is at Stake when Determining Lifetime Asset Allocation?
Credit and Capital Markets – Kredit und Kapital, Vol. 36 (2003), Iss. 2 : pp. 254–280
Additional Information
Article Details
Author Details
Gunter Löffler, Frankfurt/M.
References
-
Bernstein, P (1996): Are stocks the best place to be in the long run? A contrary opinion. Journal of Investing 5, 9-12.
Google Scholar -
Bodie, Z., and D. Crane (1997): Personal investing: Advice, theory, and evidence. Financial Analysts Journal 53, 13-23.
Google Scholar -
Bodie, Z., R. Merton and P Samuelson (1992): Labor supply flexibility and portfolio choice in a life cycle model. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 16, 427-449.
Google Scholar -
Campbell, J., J. Cocco, F. Gomes, and P Maenhout (2001a): Investing retirement wealth: a life-cycle model. Campbell, J. and M. Feldstein (Eds.), Risk Aspects of Social Security Reform. Chicago.
Google Scholar -
Campbell, J., J. Cocco, F. Gomes, P. Maenhout and L. Viceira (2001b): Stock market mean reversion and the optimal equity allocation of a long-lived investor, European Finance Review, forthcoming.
Google Scholar
Abstract
This paper examines the effects of deviating from the optimal life-cycle asset allocation. The likely magnitude of sub-optimality is gauged through an analysis of differences between available life-cycle funds. The motivation is that due to search costs, the complexity of the decision problem and other factors, investors may not choose the asset allocation profile best suited to them. The associated utility losses are quantified using a model of lifetime consumption and portfolio choice. The results suggest that these utility losses are modest. In many cases, they are smaller than the loss which arises if the return on financial assets is reduced by 0.3% per annum. The analysis helps to identify the most important decisions when saving for retirement, and to balance the costs and benefits of customising saving products. (JEL D91, G11)