Robust optimal reinsurance and ESG investment under rating-innovation ambiguity and ESG rating uncertainty
- 1School of Mathematics and Statistics, Zhaotong University, Zhaotong, Yunnan, China.
- 2School of Mathematics and Statistics, Leshan Normal University, Leshan, Sichuan, China.
Abstract
ESG ratings are noisy measurements and may also be exposed to systematic credibility concerns. We study an ambiguity-averse insurer that chooses proportional reinsurance and green and brown stock positions while learning a hidden green-quality factor from stock returns and an ESG rating signal. Signal volatility represents ordinary rating uncertainty. A worst-case distortion of the rating innovation represents ambiguity about the observation model, whereas a separate out-of-model drift gtrue is used only in stress tests for systematic rating bias. This distinction prevents robust-control ambiguity from being interpreted as observed greenwashing itself. We derive the reference Kalman–Bucy filter and the separated robust control problem. Shared stock-return shocks produce a mixed wealth-belief derivative and a filtering-hedging demand. Under CARA utility, the value function is exponential-quadratic, stock feedback follows a Riccati-type system, and retention is projected onto q∈[0,1]. The verification result is conditional on explicit admissibility and integrability conditions. Primary numerical experiments with illustrative parameters identify the model mechanisms but do not constitute empirical calibration. Independent numerical checks add Monte Carlo intervals, static and insurance-only benchmarks, original-scale plots, and a 40-design parameter-uncertainty analysis. The learning-strategy intervals overlap substantially, and rating-innovation ambiguity effects are small in CE and warning probability. Tail-risk changes are more directionally consistent across the tested parameter region, but their magnitudes remain small. The numerical evidence therefore supports mechanism existence and conditional downside sensitivity, not universal or quantitatively calibrated economic relevance.
Related
- SpacePath enables pathway and molecular-family analysis beyond annotation ambiguity in spatial metabolomics and lipidomics
- Health prevention research in France: Increasing investment is a priority, rethinking targets is equally crucial
- Informing an mpox stockpile investment case: epidemiological modelling and cost–benefit analysis
- Wideband Ambiguity Function Analysis And Quantification Protocols Of Hyperbolic Frequency-Modulated (Bio)Sonars
- Latent variable modelling of condition and reproductive investment in Gryllus vocalis field crickets
BibTeX
@article{fu2026robust,
title = {{Robust optimal reinsurance and ESG investment under rating-innovation ambiguity and ESG rating uncertainty}},
author = {Jing Fu and Guiling Zhu and Guoyong Zhou},
journal = {PLOS One},
year = {2026},
month = nov,
doi = {10.1371/journal.pone.0354616},
url = {https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0354616},
note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
TI - Robust optimal reinsurance and ESG investment under rating-innovation ambiguity and ESG rating uncertainty
AU - Jing Fu
AU - Guiling Zhu
AU - Guoyong Zhou
PY - 2026
DA - 2026/11/02
JO - PLOS One
DO - 10.1371/journal.pone.0354616
UR - https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0354616
AB - ESG ratings are noisy measurements and may also be exposed to systematic credibility concerns. We study an ambiguity-averse insurer that chooses proportional reinsurance and green and brown stock positions while learning a hidden green-quality factor from stock returns and an ESG rating signal. Signal volatility represents ordinary rating uncertainty. A worst-case distortion of the rating innovation represents ambiguity about the observation model, whereas a separate out-of-model drift gtrue is used only in stress tests for systematic rating bias. This distinction prevents robust-control ambiguity from being interpreted as observed greenwashing itself. We derive the reference Kalman–Bucy filter and the separated robust control problem. Shared stock-return shocks produce a mixed wealth-belief derivative and a filtering-hedging demand. Under CARA utility, the value function is exponential-quadratic, stock feedback follows a Riccati-type system, and retention is projected onto q∈[0,1]. The verification result is conditional on explicit admissibility and integrability conditions. Primary numerical experiments with illustrative parameters identify the model mechanisms but do not constitute empirical calibration. Independent numerical checks add Monte Carlo intervals, static and insurance-only benchmarks, original-scale plots, and a 40-design parameter-uncertainty analysis. The learning-strategy intervals overlap substantially, and rating-innovation ambiguity effects are small in CE and warning probability. Tail-risk changes are more directionally consistent across the tested parameter region, but their magnitudes remain small. The numerical evidence therefore supports mechanism existence and conditional downside sensitivity, not universal or quantitatively calibrated economic relevance.
SN - 1932-6203
ER -