Robust dividend, financing, and reinsurance strategies under model uncertainty with proportional transaction costs

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim http://www.loc.gov/standards/marcxml/schema/MARC21slim.xsd">
  <record>
    <leader>00000cab a2200000   4500</leader>
    <controlfield tag="001">MAP20240013370</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="003">MAP</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="005">20240830084154.0</controlfield>
    <controlfield tag="008">240830e20240606esp|||p      |0|||b|spa d</controlfield>
    <datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">MAP</subfield>
      <subfield code="b">spa</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">MAP</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">5</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0">
      <subfield code="a">Robust dividend, financing, and reinsurance strategies under model uncertainty with proportional transaction costs</subfield>
      <subfield code="c">Guohui Guan [et al.]</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="a">This article studies the robust dividend, financing, and reinsurance strategies for an ambiguity aversion insurer (AAI) under model uncertainty. The AAI controls its liquid reserves by purchasing proportional reinsurance, paying dividends, and issuing new equity. We consider model uncertainty and suppose that the AAI is ambiguous about the liquid reserves process, which is described by a class of equivalent probability measures. The objective of the AAI is to maximize the expected present value of the dividend payouts minus the discounted costs of issuing new equity before bankruptcy under the worst-case scenario. A detailed proof of the verification theorem is shown for the robust singular-regular problem. We obtain the explicit solutions of the robust strategies, which are classified into three cases. Numerical results are also presented to show the impacts of the ambiguity aversion coefficient, and the transaction cost factor</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080552367</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Reaseguro</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080562533</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Financiación</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080605957</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Empresas de reaseguros</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080591182</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Gerencia de riesgos</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4">
      <subfield code="0">MAPA20080627904</subfield>
      <subfield code="a">Ciencias Actuariales y Financieras</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="w">MAP20077000239</subfield>
      <subfield code="g">06/06/2024 Volume 28 Number 2 - 2024 , p. 261-284</subfield>
      <subfield code="x">1092-0277</subfield>
      <subfield code="t">North American actuarial journal</subfield>
      <subfield code="d">Schaumburg : Society of Actuaries, 1997-</subfield>
    </datafield>
    <datafield tag="856" ind1=" " ind2=" ">
      <subfield code="u">https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10920277.2023.2186430</subfield>
    </datafield>
  </record>
</collection>