Abstract
An earlier contribution to this journal implied that protective floor investment strategies in defined-contribution pension investments beat investments in traditional asset mixes, with respect to both the probability of achieving a minimum target level of future pension income and the expected level of future pension income. These commentators show that protective floor strategies may be attractive to loss-averse investors, but they do not beat traditional investments simultaneously on expected pension income and on the probability of achieving the target pension income.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
