IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/aeb/wpaper/201511y2015.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Consistent tests for risk seeking behavior: A stochastic dominance approach

Author

Listed:
  • Stelios Arvanitis

    (Athens University of Economics and Business)

  • Nikolas Topaloglou

    (Athens University of Economics and Business)

Abstract

We develop non-parametric tests for prospect stochastic dominance Efficiency (PSDE) and Markowitz stochastic dominance efficiency (MSDE) with rejection regions determined by block bootstrap resampling techniques. Under the appropriate conditions we show that they are asymptotically conservative and consistent. We engage into Monte Carlo experiments to assess the nite sample size and power of the tests allowing for the presence of numerical errors. We use them to empirically analyze investor preferences and beliefs by testing whether the value-weighted market portfolio can be considered as efficient according to prospect and Markowitz stochastic dominance criteria when confronted to diversi cation principles made of risky assets. Our results indicate that we cannot reject the hypothesis of prospect stochastic dominance efficiency for the market portfolio. This is supportive of the claim that the particular portfolio can be rationalized as the optimal choice for any S-shaped utility function. Instead, we reject the hypothesis for Markowitz stochastic dominance, which could imply that there exist reverse S-shaped utility functions that do not rationalize the market portfolio.

Suggested Citation

  • Stelios Arvanitis & Nikolas Topaloglou, 2015. "Consistent tests for risk seeking behavior: A stochastic dominance approach," Working Papers 201511, Athens University Of Economics and Business, Department of Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:aeb:wpaper:201511:y:2015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www2.econ.aueb.gr/uploadfiles/AllDP112015
    File Function: Released version, 2015
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Horvath, Lajos & Kokoszka, Piotr & Zitikis, Ricardas, 2006. "Testing for stochastic dominance using the weighted McFadden-type statistic," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(1), pages 191-205, July.
    2. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 2007. "Improving the reliability of bootstrap tests with the fast double bootstrap," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 51(7), pages 3259-3281, April.
    3. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56(4), pages 279-279.
    4. Levy, Haim, 1973. "Stochastic Dominance Among Log-Normal Prospects," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 14(3), pages 601-614, October.
    5. Russell Davidson & Jean-Yves Duclos, 2000. "Statistical Inference for Stochastic Dominance and for the Measurement of Poverty and Inequality," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(6), pages 1435-1464, November.
    6. Levy, Haim, 1982. "Stochastic Dominance Rules for Truncated Normal Distributions: A Note," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 37(5), pages 1299-1303, December.
    7. Davidson, Russell & MacKinnon, James G., 2006. "The power of bootstrap and asymptotic tests," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 421-441, August.
    8. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    9. Garry F. Barrett & Stephen G. Donald, 2003. "Consistent Tests for Stochastic Dominance," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(1), pages 71-104, January.
    10. Fama, Eugene F. & French, Kenneth R., 1993. "Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 3-56, February.
    11. Edwards, Kimberley D., 1996. "Prospect theory: A literature review," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 5(1), pages 19-38.
    12. Manel Baucells & Franz H. Heukamp, 2006. "Stochastic Dominance and Cumulative Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 52(9), pages 1409-1423, September.
    13. Jesus Gonzalo & Jose Olmo, 2014. "Conditional Stochastic Dominance Tests In Dynamic Settings," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 55, pages 819-838, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Arvanitis, Stelios & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2017. "Testing for prospect and Markowitz stochastic dominance efficiency," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 198(2), pages 253-270.
    2. Topaloglou, Nikolas & Tsionas, Mike G., 2020. "Stochastic dominance tests," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    3. Arvanitis, Stelios & Scaillet, Olivier & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "Spanning tests for Markowitz stochastic dominance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 217(2), pages 291-311.
    4. Hooi Hooi Lean & Michael McAleer & Wing-Keung Wong, 2013. "Risk-averse and Risk-seeking Investor Preferences for Oil Spot and Futures," Documentos de Trabajo del ICAE 2013-31, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Instituto Complutense de Análisis Económico, revised Aug 2013.
    5. Raymond H. Chan & Ephraim Clark & Xu Guo & Wing-Keung Wong, 2020. "New development on the third-order stochastic dominance for risk-averse and risk-seeking investors with application in risk management," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(2), pages 108-132, June.
    6. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    7. Lean, Hooi Hooi & McAleer, Michael & Wong, Wing-Keung, 2015. "Preferences of risk-averse and risk-seeking investors for oil spot and futures before, during and after the Global Financial Crisis," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 204-216.
    8. Fong, Wai Mun & Lean, Hooi Hooi & Wong, Wing Keung, 2008. "Stochastic dominance and behavior towards risk: The market for Internet stocks," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 68(1), pages 194-208, October.
    9. Levy, Haim & Levy, Moshe, 2021. "Stocks versus bonds for the long run when a riskless asset is available," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    10. Arvanitis, Stelios & Scaillet, Olivier & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "Spanning analysis of stock market anomalies under prospect stochastic dominance," Working Papers unige:134101, University of Geneva, Geneva School of Economics and Management.
    11. Zhihui Lv & Amanda M. Y. Chu & Wing Keung Wong & Thomas C. Chiang, 2021. "The maximum-return-and-minimum-volatility effect: evidence from choosing risky and riskless assets to form a portfolio," Risk Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(1), pages 97-122, June.
    12. Sheung-Chi Chow & Ma. Rebecca Valenzuela & Wing-Keung Wong, 2016. "New Tests for Richness and Poorness:A Stochastic Dominance Analysis of Income Distributions in Hong Kong," Monash Economics Working Papers 25-16, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    13. Ng, Pin & Wong, Wing-Keung & Xiao, Zhijie, 2017. "Stochastic dominance via quantile regression with applications to investigate arbitrage opportunity and market efficiency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 666-678.
    14. Kuan Xu & Gordon Fisher, 2006. "Myopic loss aversion and margin of safety: the risk of value investing," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(6), pages 481-494.
    15. Lam, Kin & Lean, Hooi Hooi & Wong, Wing-Keung, 2016. "Stochastic Dominance and Investors’ Behavior towards Risk: The Hong Kong Stocks and Futures Markets," MPRA Paper 74386, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    16. Isabel Abinzano & Luis Muga & Rafael Santamaria, 2010. "Do Managerial Skills Vary Across Fund Managers? Results Using European Mutual Funds," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 38(1), pages 41-67, August.
    17. Moshe Levy & Haim Levy, 2013. "Prospect Theory: Much Ado About Nothing?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 7, pages 129-144, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    18. E. Agliardi & M. Pinar & T. Stengos, 2014. "Assessing temporal trends and industry contributions to air and water pollution using stochastic dominance," Working Papers wp981, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    19. Neszveda, G., 2019. "Essays on behavioral finance," Other publications TiSEM 05059039-5236-42a3-be1b-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    20. David Lander & David Gunawan & William Griffiths & Duangkamon Chotikapanich, 2020. "Bayesian assessment of Lorenz and stochastic dominance," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 53(2), pages 767-799, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Non parametric test; prospect stochastic dominance efficiency; Markowitz stochastic dominance efficiency; simplical complex; extremal point; Linear Programming; Mixed Integer Programming; Block Bootstrap; Consistency;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C12 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Hypothesis Testing: General
    • C13 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Estimation: General
    • C15 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General - - - Statistical Simulation Methods: General
    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aeb:wpaper:201511:y:2015. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Katerina Michailidou (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/auebugr.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.