Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/28039
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLi, Z-
dc.contributor.authorKara, A-
dc.date.accessioned2024-01-18T14:54:24Z-
dc.date.available2022-02-06-
dc.date.available2024-01-18T14:54:24Z-
dc.date.issued2022-02-06-
dc.identifierORCID iD: Alper Kara https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8560-0501-
dc.identifier102064-
dc.identifier.citationLi, Z. and . (2022) 'Pension de-risking choice and firm risk: Traditional versus innovative strategies', International Review of Financial Analysis, 81, 102064, pp. 1 - 17. doi: 10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102064.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1057-5219-
dc.identifier.urihttps://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/28039-
dc.descriptionData availability: Data will be made available on request.en_US
dc.description.abstractWe examine the determinants of firms defined-benefit pension plan de-risking strategy choices and their impact on firm risk. We compile a hand-collected dataset for FTSE 350 firms for the period of 2009–2017. We find that hard freezing and pension buy-ins are more likely to be implemented when pension plans have longer investment horizons. In particular, pension plans that are exposed to higher investment risk are more likely to adopt pension buy-ins. Firms with larger capital expenditure and market capitalization are more likely to utilise innovative de-risking strategies (i.e. buy-in and longevity swap) in addition to traditional strategies (i.e. soft and hard freezing). Financially constrained firms are more likely to implement longevity swap over pension buy-ins. We also find that implementing pension de-risking strategies reduce firm risk. However, the effectiveness varies depending on the strategy with buy-ins having the largest impact in reducing risk.en_US
dc.format.extent1 - 17-
dc.format.mediumPrint-Electronic-
dc.languageEnglish-
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.rightsCopyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).-
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/-
dc.subjectpension de-riskingen_US
dc.subjectdefined-benefit pension plansen_US
dc.subjectpension freezingen_US
dc.subjectpension buy-inen_US
dc.subjectlongevity swapen_US
dc.titlePension de-risking choice and firm risk: Traditional versus innovative strategiesen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttps://doi.org/10.1016/j.irfa.2022.102064-
dc.relation.isPartOfInternational Review of Financial Analysis-
pubs.publication-statusPublished-
pubs.volume81-
dc.identifier.eissn1873-8079-
dc.rights.holderThe Authors-
Appears in Collections:Dept of Economics and Finance Research Papers

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
FullText.pdfCopyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).622.13 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons