How Tail Risk Projects Survive the Waiting Period: From Two Failure Cases to an Eight-Step Due Diligence Framework

This article treats the holding costs, behavioral pressures, and governance burdens of tail risk hedging during calm periods as design constraints rather than post-hoc inconveniences. The authors first break down three types of "bleeding" sources: direct holding costs, opportunity costs, and evaluation pressure, and provide a table of cumulative sleeve losses for different annualized carry rates over 3 to 15 years, as well as a table of portfolio-level annual drag converted by sleeve weight.