Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
So it means that the discount rate of liabilities is always a min return requirement for the plan’s assets ?S666 wrote:
Surplus or deficit doesn’t affect return requirement at all….it affects risk tolerance.
that or the immunization rate. depending on your funded statusGmax wrote:
So it means that the discount rate of liabilities is always a min return requirement for the plan’s assets ?S666 wrote:
Surplus or deficit doesn’t affect return requirement at all….it affects risk tolerance.
What’s the difference between immunization rate and liability discount rate?AlmostDoneIII wrote:
that or the immunization rate. depending on your funded statusGmax wrote:
So it means that the discount rate of liabilities is always a min return requirement for the plan’s assets ?S666 wrote:
Surplus or deficit doesn’t affect return requirement at all….it affects risk tolerance.
Yeah i would also think they are the same, as the immunisation rate is the rate that locks in the same rate of return at which the liabilities are being dscounted at. Makes sense to me.MrSmart wrote:
Makes sense. But I was wondering if the immunization rate is different from the discount rate. I thought they were the same.
Mossiac is correct… it just adds a second step. if you see a problem with 2 rates. you need to use both.MrSmart wrote:
I’d like to see what AlmostDoneIII has to say about this, since he looks to have other thoughts.
That doesn’t make sense still. Immunization rate is not the desired rate, it’s the rate at which you will completely immunize your portfolio, which is also the discount rate of the liabilities. You cannot have one over the other, at least to my understanding from the book.Mosstastic wrote:
There are instances where the discount rate the immunization rate will differ. When they do, that’s when we deploy a contingent immunization strategy.
We can fully immunize the portfolio at 4%, but the discount rate may indeed be lower than this at 3%. This is the difference AlmostDoneIII is referring to.
However, I’d never imagine that the immunization rate, if higher, would be the minimum return requirement. It’s more likely in the above case that the immunization rate would instead be the desired return, and the discount rate is still the critical return requirement.
Ding Ding Ding Winner Winner chicken dinnerS666 wrote:
I think Mr Smart and I are calling the immunisation rate the actual rate you lock in as soon as your dollar safety margin drops to zero, whereas moss and almostdone are calling the immunisation rate the higher rate available on the portfolio which you use to calculate your dollar safety margin in the first place. That’s where the disagreement lies….other than that, I think we would be in agreement.
I hope you realize that it’s not correct.AlmostDoneIII wrote:
Ding Ding Ding Winner Winner chicken dinnerS666 wrote:
I think Mr Smart and I are calling the immunisation rate the actual rate you lock in as soon as your dollar safety margin drops to zero, whereas moss and almostdone are calling the immunisation rate the higher rate available on the portfolio which you use to calculate your dollar safety margin in the first place. That’s where the disagreement lies….other than that, I think we would be in agreement.
I think you’re reading way into the terminolgy and missing the point. But anyways you can stick to what you are doing and i’ll stick to what i’m doing cause I haven’t missed any of these related questions.MrSmart wrote:
I hope you realize that it’s not correct.AlmostDoneIII wrote:
Ding Ding Ding Winner Winner chicken dinnerS666 wrote:
I think Mr Smart and I are calling the immunisation rate the actual rate you lock in as soon as your dollar safety margin drops to zero, whereas moss and almostdone are calling the immunisation rate the higher rate available on the portfolio which you use to calculate your dollar safety margin in the first place. That’s where the disagreement lies….other than that, I think we would be in agreement.