IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1507.02025.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Diversification Preferences in the Theory of Choice

Author

Listed:
  • Enrico G. De Giorgi
  • Ola Mahmoud

Abstract

Diversification represents the idea of choosing variety over uniformity. Within the theory of choice, desirability of diversification is axiomatized as preference for a convex combination of choices that are equivalently ranked. This corresponds to the notion of risk aversion when one assumes the von-Neumann-Morgenstern expected utility model, but the equivalence fails to hold in other models. This paper studies axiomatizations of the concept of diversification and their relationship to the related notions of risk aversion and convex preferences within different choice theoretic models. Implications of these notions on portfolio choice are discussed. We cover model-independent diversification preferences, preferences within models of choice under risk, including expected utility theory and the more general rank-dependent expected utility theory, as well as models of choice under uncertainty axiomatized via Choquet expected utility theory. Remarks on interpretations of diversification preferences within models of behavioral choice are given in the conclusion.

Suggested Citation

  • Enrico G. De Giorgi & Ola Mahmoud, 2015. "Diversification Preferences in the Theory of Choice," Papers 1507.02025, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2016.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1507.02025
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1507.02025
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Claudio Campanale, 2011. "Learning, Ambiguity and Life-Cycle Portfolio Allocation," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 14(2), pages 339-367, April.
    2. Dekel, Eddie, 1989. "Asset Demands without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(1), pages 163-169, January.
    3. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
    4. Cerreia-Vioglio, S. & Maccheroni, F. & Marinacci, M. & Montrucchio, L., 2011. "Uncertainty averse preferences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(4), pages 1275-1330, July.
    5. Hui Chen & Nengjiu Ju & Jianjun Miao, 2014. "Dynamic Asset Allocation with Ambiguous Return Predictability," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 17(4), pages 799-823, October.
    6. Hong, Chew Soo & Karni, Edi & Safra, Zvi, 1987. "Risk aversion in the theory of expected utility with rank dependent probabilities," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 370-381, August.
    7. Phelim Boyle & Lorenzo Garlappi & Raman Uppal & Tan Wang, 2012. "Keynes Meets Markowitz: The Trade-Off Between Familiarity and Diversification," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 253-272, February.
    8. Raman Uppal & Tan Wang, 2003. "Model Misspecification and Underdiversification," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(6), pages 2465-2486, December.
    9. Alain Chateauneuf & Ghizlane Lakhnati, 2007. "From sure to strong diversification," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 32(3), pages 511-522, September.
    10. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    11. Quiggin, John, 1991. "Comparative Statics for Rank-Dependent Expected Utility Theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(4), pages 339-350, December.
    12. Gilboa, Itzhak, 1987. "Expected utility with purely subjective non-additive probabilities," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 65-88, February.
    13. Wakker, Peter, 1990. "Characterizing optimism and pessimism directly through comonotonicity," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 52(2), pages 453-463, December.
    14. Jean-Marc Tallon & Alain Chateauneuf, 2002. "Diversification, convex preferences and non-empty core in the Choquet expected utility model," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 19(3), pages 509-523.
    15. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "Portfolio Selection," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 7(1), pages 77-91, March.
    16. Pascal J. Maenhout, 2004. "Robust Portfolio Rules and Asset Pricing," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(4), pages 951-983.
    17. 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..
    18. Ross, Stephen A, 1981. "Some Stronger Measures of Risk Aversion in the Small and the Large with Applications," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 621-638, May.
    19. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    20. Lorenzo Garlappi & Raman Uppal & Tan Wang, 2007. "Portfolio Selection with Parameter and Model Uncertainty: A Multi-Prior Approach," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 20(1), pages 41-81, January.
    21. Allais Maurice, 1990. "Cardinal Utility," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 1(2), pages 1-38, June.
    22. Simone Cerreia-Vioglio & Fabio Maccheroni & Massimo Marinacci & Luigi Montrucchio, 2008. "Risk Measures: Rationality and Diversification," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 100, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    23. Ghirardato, Paolo & Marinacci, Massimo, 2002. "Ambiguity Made Precise: A Comparative Foundation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 102(2), pages 251-289, February.
    24. Chateauneuf, Alain & Cohen, Michele, 1994. "Risk Seeking with Diminishing Marginal Utility in a Non-expected Utility Model," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 9(1), pages 77-91, July.
    25. Jiankang Zhang, 2002. "Subjective ambiguity, expected utility and Choquet expected utility," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 20(1), pages 159-181.
    26. Stephen G. Dimmock & Roy Kouwenberg & Olivia S. Mitchell & Kim Peijnenburg, 2013. "Ambiguity Aversion and Household Portfolio Choice: Empirical Evidence," NBER Working Papers 18743, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    27. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    28. Larry G. Epstein, 1999. "A Definition of Uncertainty Aversion," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 66(3), pages 579-608.
    29. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    30. Hening Liu, 2010. "Robust consumption and portfolio choice for time varying investment opportunities," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 435-454, October.
    31. Dow, James & Werlang, Sergio Ribeiro da Costa, 1992. "Uncertainty Aversion, Risk Aversion, and the Optimal Choice of Portfolio," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(1), pages 197-204, January.
    32. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    33. Machina, Mark J, 1982. "A Stronger Characterization of Declining Risk Aversion," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(4), pages 1069-1079, July.
    34. Philippe Artzner & Freddy Delbaen & Jean‐Marc Eber & David Heath, 1999. "Coherent Measures of Risk," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 203-228, July.
    35. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    36. Samuel Drapeau & Michael Kupper, 2013. "Risk Preferences and Their Robust Representation," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(1), pages 28-62, February.
    37. Ramsey, Frank P., 1926. "Truth and Probability," Histoy of Economic Thought Chapters, in: Braithwaite, R. B. (ed.),The Foundations of Mathematics and other Logical Essays, chapter 7, pages 156-198, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought.
    38. Michael Landsberger & Isaac Meilijson, 1993. "Mean-preserving Portfolio Dominance," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 60(2), pages 479-485.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Assa, Hirbod & Zimper, Alexander, 2018. "Preferences over all random variables: Incompatibility of convexity and continuity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 71-83.
    2. Mario Fortin & Marcelin Joanis & Philippe Kabore & Luc Savard, 2022. "Determination of Quebec's Quarterly Real GDP and Analysis of the Business Cycle, 1948–1980," Journal of Business Cycle Research, Springer;Centre for International Research on Economic Tendency Surveys (CIRET), vol. 18(3), pages 261-288, November.
    3. Ola Mahmoud, 2022. "The Willingness to Pay for Diversification," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(8), pages 6235-6249, August.
    4. Wakker, Peter P. & Yang, Jingni, 2019. "A powerful tool for analyzing concave/convex utility and weighting functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 143-159.
    5. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Ola Mahmoud, 2016. "Naive Diversification Preferences and their Representation," Papers 1611.01285, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2016.
    6. Gilles Boevi Koumou & Georges Dionne, 2022. "Coherent Diversification Measures in Portfolio Theory: An Axiomatic Foundation," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, October.
    7. Gilles Boevi Koumou, 2020. "Diversification and portfolio theory: a review," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 34(3), pages 267-312, September.

    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. Massimo Guidolin & Francesca Rinaldi, 2013. "Ambiguity in asset pricing and portfolio choice: a review of the literature," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 74(2), pages 183-217, February.
    2. Trabelsi, Mohamed Ali, 2006. "Les nouveaux modèles de décision dans le risque et l’incertain : quel apport ? [The new models of decision under risk or uncertainty : What approach?]," MPRA Paper 25442, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Karni, Edi & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo, 2015. "Ambiguity and Nonexpected Utility," Handbook of Game Theory with Economic Applications,, Elsevier.
    4. Michèle Cohen & Isaac Meilijson, 2014. "Preference for safety under the Choquet model: in search of a characterization," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 55(3), pages 619-642, April.
    5. Loïc Berger & Louis Eeckhoudt, 2021. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Value of Diversification," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1639-1647, March.
    6. Assa, Hirbod & Zimper, Alexander, 2018. "Preferences over all random variables: Incompatibility of convexity and continuity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 71-83.
    7. Dillenberger, David & Segal, Uzi, 2017. "Skewed noise," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 344-364.
    8. Izhakian, Yehuda, 2017. "Expected utility with uncertain probabilities theory," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 91-103.
    9. Loïc Berger & Louis Eeckhoudt, 2020. "Risk, Ambiguity, And The Value Of Diversification," Working Papers hal-02910906, HAL.
    10. Moez Abouda & Elyess Farhoud, 2010. "Risk aversion and Relationships in model-free," Post-Print halshs-00492170, HAL.
    11. Moez Abouda & Elyess Farhoud, 2010. "Anti-comonotone random variables and anti-monotone risk aversion," Post-Print halshs-00497444, HAL.
    12. Shaw, W. Douglass & Woodward, Richard T., 2008. "Why environmental and resource economists should care about non-expected utility models," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1), pages 66-89, January.
    13. Wakker, Peter P. & Yang, Jingni, 2019. "A powerful tool for analyzing concave/convex utility and weighting functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 181(C), pages 143-159.
    14. Cerreia-Vioglio, Simone & Maccheroni, Fabio & Marinacci, Massimo & Montrucchio, Luigi, 2012. "Probabilistic sophistication, second order stochastic dominance and uncertainty aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 48(5), pages 271-283.
    15. Alain Chateauneuf & Luciano De Castro, 2011. "Ambiguity Aversion and Absence of Trade," Discussion Papers 1535, Northwestern University, Center for Mathematical Studies in Economics and Management Science.
    16. Chateauneuf, Alain & Ventura, Caroline, 2010. "The no-trade interval of Dow and Werlang: Some clarifications," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 59(1), pages 1-14, January.
    17. Grant, S. & Quiggin, J., 2001. "A Model-Free Definition of Increasing Uncertainty," Discussion Paper 2001-84, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    18. Alain Chateauneuf & Ghizlane Lakhnati, 2007. "From sure to strong diversification," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 32(3), pages 511-522, September.
    19. Trabelsi, Mohamed Ali, 2010. "Choix de portefeuille: comparaison des différentes stratégies [Portfolio selection: comparison of different strategies]," MPRA Paper 82946, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 01 Dec 2010.
    20. Zvi Safra & Uzi Segal, 2005. "Are Universal Preferences Possible? Calibration Results for Non-Expected Utility Theories," Boston College Working Papers in Economics 633, Boston College Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • 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:arx:papers:1507.02025. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.