Despite the magnitude of the recent earthquake in Chile – in both physical and financial terms – it's unlikely to trigger a catastrophe bond payout. Catastrophe modeling firms AIR Worldwide and EQECAT offer a range of estimated insured losses of $2 billion to $8 billion, though the dust is still settling. According to insurance securitization blog Artemis.bm, "A similar quake in the right area of the U.S. or Japan would most certainly have triggered a cat bond."

Though there has been cat bond activity in Latin America, none have been issued in the region to cover earthquake risk. Low rates of insurance penetration are likely to keep what will already be a costly situation for insurers and reinsurers from being even worse -- i.e., because not much coverage has been written in Chile.

Analyst Upgrades

• Keefe Bruyette upgraded MSCI Inc. (MXB) to outperform from market perform on valuation following Monday's sell-off as it views the acquisition of RiskMetrics (RISK) favorably. The firm has a $36 price target on shares. UBS also upgraded MSCI, to buy from neutral, and raised its target to $40 from $34, citing the recent pullback in shares and the accretive acquisition of RiskMetrics.
• Deutsche Bank upgraded Suncor (SU) to hold from sell on valuation and raised its price target on shares to $28 from $20. The firm continues to prefer Canadian Natural (CNQ) to Suncor, however, and raised its target on shares to $80 from $78.
• JMP Securities upgraded Grubb & Ellis (GBE) to outperform from market perform based on the improved operating environment and balance sheet, and valuation, among other reasons.
• Dell (DELL) was upgraded to buy from neutral at UBS.
• FEMSA (FMX) was upgraded to overweight from neutral at HSBC.
• Westar Energy (WR) was upgraded to outperform from market perform at Wells Fargo.

In a high stakes game of chicken this past week, the Senate GOP and UAW leadership could not agree on setting a date certain for cutting members wages and the hard-line senators would not accept anything less. (See Auto 'support fund': Senate & UAW clash.)

One of the ironies of the proposed, and not passed, Federal bailout, or support fund, as I have begun to call it, depending on your point of view, is that the proposed $14 billion is more than the value Wall Street currently places on the two companies.

General Motors (NYSE: GM) closed Friday at $3.94, down $0.18 or 4.37%, with a capitalization of $2.4 billion. Ford (NYSE: F) closed at $3.04, up $0.14 or4.83%, with a capitalization of $7.04 billion. The combined value therefore is $9.44 billion; yes folks, another Washington bargain!

While world markets sank on the news of the failed talks, U.S. investors yawned and were unimpressed with activity in foreign markets -- all three of the major indices ended up for the day. Perhaps that's because temporarily propping up the two companies by spending more than they're worth made no sense to anyone outside Washington D.C. or Detroit.

Sheldon Liber is the CEO of a small private investment company and the principal for design and research at an architecture and planning firm. He writes the columns Chasing Value and Serious Money. Disclosure: I do not own shares of GM or Ford.

What if you went to Las Vegas, sat down at your favorite slot machine, and very time you dropped in $1, you got back $2? I'll bet you would never leave!

This is the holy grail. Great returns without any risk.

It doesn't work that way in Las Vegas. Why do you think investing is any different?

The foundation of returns is risk. The higher the risk, the greater the potential for returns -- or for losses.

You can achieve returns without risk. However, to do so you need to invest in what are known as "risk-free" investments. These include FDIC-insured Certificates of Deposits and Treasury Bills.

The problem with "risk-free" investments is that they generate relatively low returns. The historical returns of Treasury Bills is 3.7%. After inflation and taxes, there is little profit remaining.

Most people want higher returns than they can get with "risk-free" investments. To do so, you need to invest in the domestic or foreign stock markets (preferably both) and in bonds, which can vary in terms of safety.

Any smart gambler, amateur or professional, knows that you only risk what you can afford to lose. That may be $1, $100, $500, or even a million dollars in a real estate or other major transaction. But only a fool bets the farm. Only a fool risks all.

What made so many bright minds all around the world foolishly bet the farm? One after another, that is what they did. Now we are all paying for it, some more than others. It was not just greed. It was something else.

How did this happen? I call it 'The Great Disconnect'.

When the managers of public companies do not suffer the same fate or consequences as their shareholders you have a disconnect! When politicians give lip service to understanding the pain of their constituencies but accept huge contributions from the enterprises they are supposed to regulate and oversee creating gargantuan conflicts of interest, you have a great disconnect.

When investment houses create financial instruments that are so complex that they cannot fathom the risk and the ratings agencies put candy coated frosting on them, you have a great disconnect!

I would propose that legislators not be allowed to accept any contribution creating a conflict of interest based on the committees they sit on. $700 billion reprise: Conservative bankers? Surely you jest!

I might even consider creating an independent committee of citizens selected from the willing, be placed in a position to review such matters.

In this month's Portfolio magazine, Michael Lewis wonders if the Black-Scholes formula -- the formula used to calculate and manage risk throughout the financial world, including determining the risk of trade positions and hedging strategies -- is flawed.

The Black-Scholes formula is an advanced mathematical formula generally credited with revolutionizing options pricing. Its assumptions are the basis for short trades and options designed to protect a trader against losses, no matter how much the market falls.

However, as Lewis outlines, while the formula has been good, it is not perfect, as evidenced by the October 1987 stock market crash, when traders and institutions learned that even with Black-Scholes techniques deployed, when the market is crashing and no one is willing to buy, it's impossible to sell short. The outcome? On "Black Monday," the Dow Jones Industrial Average plunged 508 points or 22.6% on October 19, 1987.

Robert J. Shiller's Irrational Exuberance is the classic book for understanding the stock market bubble of the late 1990s and early 2000s. His contribution to the study of real estate is equally compelling. The House Price Index used to track our real estate market was co-developed by Mr. Shiller -- and is innovative in that it adjusts for the quality of homes involved in transactions.

So given his expertise in bubbles and real estate, he is probably the guy to listen to when it comes to the topic of the real estate bubble.

In a column in this Sunday's New York Times, Shiller gives an interesting possible explanation for a question that hasn't gotten a lot of attention: Why were Alan Greenspan -- and a lot of other presumably intelligent people -- unable to see that real estate bubble for what it was given that, in retrospect, it seems so obvious?

The answer may lie in a psychological phenomenon known as information cascade. Be sure to read Shiller's column for an explanation of how this may have applied to the real estate market. It's fascinating stuff.

And understanding why the bubble wasn't widely detectable is key to understanding why it happened. As Shiller writes, "The failure to recognize the housing bubble is the core reason for the collapsing house of cards we are seeing in financial markets in the United States and around the world. If people do not see any risk, and see only the prospect of outsized investment returns, they will pursue those returns with disregard for the risks."

Washington Mutual (NYSE: WM) had assets of $312 billion on 6/30/07.

• WM is recently trading at $34.96 in pre-open trading, below its close of $35.28.
  
• WM says: "Weakening housing market and disruptions in the secondary market through the end of the third quarter will result in a decline in net income of approximately 75% from the prior quarter."
  
• WM will announce full EPS on 10/17.
  
• WM overall option implied volatility of 35 is above its 26-week average of 30 according to Track Data, suggesting larger price fluctuations.

Merrill Lynch (NYSE: MER) is recently trading at $73.70 in pre-open trading, below its close of $74.78.

• MER says: "Challenging credit market conditions will have an adverse impact on its net earnings for the third quarter. The company expects to report a net loss per diluted shares of up to $0.50 cents, resulting form significant negative mark-to-market adjustments."
  
• MER October option implied volatility of 44 is above its 26-week average of 30 according to Track Data, suggesting larger risk.

Daily options Update is provided by Stock Specialist Paul Foster of theflyonthewall.com