##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##

This study examines the relationship between Cat Bonds market and the other financial markets. Precisely, cointegration tests (the Engle and Granger’s methodology) were applied on weekly data of five indexes over the period 2012- 2019 to test for the existence of a long-run dynamic equilibrium relationship between Cat Bonds market and four financial markets, namely, Insurance Linked Securities (ILS) market, S&P 500 (first stock market), MSCI (second stock market) and Corporate Bonds market. In addition, a comparative analysis correlation vs cointegration was conducted to verify whether Cat Bonds can be really considered as zero-beta assets in the short-run (correlation) as well as the long-run (cointegration). For correlation analysis we employed three correlation coefficients (Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient, Spearman’s Rank Correlation Coefficient and Kendall's Rank Correlation Coefficient). Overall, the main findings of this study showed that in the short-run, Cat Bonds are partially zero-beta assets while over the long-run they are entirely zero-beta assets. Such results will be of great importance for investors in their decision choice between a short strategy or a long strategy in Cat Bonds’ investing.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. H. Kat, “The dangers of using correlation to measure dependence,” Journal of Alternative Investments, vol.6, no.2, pp. 54-58, 2003.
     Google Scholar
  2. C. Alexander, I. Giblin, and W. Weddington, “Cointegration and asset allocation: a new active hedge fund strategy,” Research in International Business and Finance, vol. 16, pp. 65-90, 2002.
     Google Scholar
  3. E. P. Chan, (November, 6 2006). “Cointegration Is Not the Same as Correlation,” Quantitative investment and Trading ideas and research. Available: https://www.epchan.com/downloads/cointegration.pdf.
     Google Scholar
  4. R. F. Engle and C. W. J. Granger, “Co-integration and error correction: Representation estimation and testing,” Econometrica, vol. 55, no.2, pp. 251–276, 1987.
     Google Scholar
  5. J. Major and R. Kreps, “Catastrophe Risk Pricing in the Traditional Market,” Risk Books, 2003.
     Google Scholar
  6. S. Bouriaux and R. MacMinn, “Securitization of Catastrophe Risk: New Developments in Insurance-Linked Securities and Derivatives,” Journal of Insurance Issues, vol. 32, no. 1, pp.1-34, 2009.
     Google Scholar
  7. R. Litzenberger, D. Beaglehole and C. Reynolds, “Assessing Catastrophe Reinsurance-Linked Securities as a New Asset Class,” Journal of Portfolio Management, vol. 23, pp. 76-86, 1996.
     Google Scholar
  8. Z. TAO, “Zero-Beta Characteristic of CAT Bonds,” In: BIFE ’11 Proceedings of the 2011 Fourth International Conference on Business Intelligence and Financial Engineering, pp. 641-644, 2011.
     Google Scholar
  9. S. Dieckmann, “A Consumption-Based Evaluation of the Cat Bond Market.” Working Paper, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 2011.
     Google Scholar
  10. M. Galeotti, M. Gürtler and C. Winkelvos, “Accuracy of Premium Calculation Models for CAT Bonds: An Empirical Analysis,” Journal of Risk and Insurance, vol. 80, no. 2, pp. 401-421, 2013.
     Google Scholar
  11. J. Cummins and M. Weiss, “Convergence of Insurance and Financial Markets: Hybrid and Securitized Risk-transfer Solutions,” Journal of Risk and Insurance, vol. 76, no. 3, pp. 493-545, 2009.
     Google Scholar
  12. P. Carayannopoulos and M. F. Perez, “Diversification through Catastrophe Bonds: Lessons from the Subprime Financial Crisis,” The Geneva Papers on Risk and Insurance-Issues and Practice, VOL. 40, no. 1, pp. 1-28, 2015.
     Google Scholar
  13. M. Gürtler, M. Hibbeln and C. Winkelvos, “The Impact of the Financial Crisis and Natural Catastrophes on CAT Bonds,” The Journal of Risk and Insurance, vol. 83, no. 3, pp. 579-612, 2016.
     Google Scholar
  14. J. D. Cummins, “CAT Bonds and Other Risk-Linked Securities: State of the Market and Recent Developments,” Risk Management and Insurance Review, vol.11, no. 1, pp. 23-47, 2008.
     Google Scholar
  15. A. Krutov, “Investing in Insurance Risk: Insurance-linked Securities: A Practitioner's Perspective,” Risk Books, 2010.
     Google Scholar
  16. L. G. Constantin, “Portfolio diversification through structured catastrophe bonds amidst the financial crisis,” Economic Sciences Series, vol. 63, no. 3, pp. :75-84, 2011.
     Google Scholar
  17. D. S. A. Simoes, “Can we profit from natural disasters? The role of catastrophe bonds,”Dissertation, Universita Catolica Lisbon, 2015.
     Google Scholar
  18. S. P. Clark, M. Dickson, and F. R. Neale, (July 7, 2016). “Portfolio Diversification Effects of Catastrophe Bonds,” SSRN. Available: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2806432
     Google Scholar
  19. R. J. Kish, “Catastrophe (Cat) bonds: Risk offsets with diversification and high returns,” Financial Services Review, vol. 25, no. 3, pp. 303-329, 2016.
     Google Scholar
  20. J. D. Haley, “Further Considerations of Underwriting Margins, Interest Rates, Stability, Stationarity, Cointegration, and Time Trends,” Journal of Insurance Issues, vol. 30, no 1, pp. 62-75, 2007.
     Google Scholar
  21. D. A. Dickey and W. A. Fuller, “Likelihood Ratio Statistics for Autoregressive Time Series with a Unit Root,” Econometrica, vol. 49, no 4, pp.1057–1072, 1981.
     Google Scholar