This file is part of IDEAS, which uses RePEc data


[ Papers | Articles | Software | Books | Chapters | Authors | Institutions | JEL Classification | NEP reports | Search | New papers by email | Author registration | Rankings | Volunteers | FAQ | Blog | Help! ]

Prospect and Markowitz Stochastic Dominance

Author info | Abstract | Publisher info | Download info | Related research | Statistics
Author Info
Wing-Keung Wong
Raymond H. Chan

Additional information is available for the following registered author(s):

Abstract

Levy and Levy (2002, 2004) develop the Prospect and Markowitz stochastic dominance theory with S-shaped and reverse S-shaped utility functions for investors. In this paper, we extend Levy and Levy's Prospect Stochastic Dominance theory (PSD) and Markowitz Stochastic Dominance theory (MSD) to the first three orders and link the corresponding S-shaped and reverse S-shaped utility functions to the first three orders. We also provide experiments to illustrate each case of the MSD and PSD to the first three orders and demonstrate that the higher order MSD and PSD cannot be replaced by the lower order MSD and PSD. Prospect theory has been regarded as a challenge to the expected utility paradigm. Levy and Levy (2002) prove that the second order PSD and MSD satisfy the expected utility paradigm. In our paper we take Levy and Levy's results one step further by showing that both PSD and MSD of any order are consistent with the expected utility paradigm. Furthermore, we formulate some other properties for the PSD and MSD including the hierarchy that exists in both PSD and MSD relationships; arbitrage opportunities that exist in the first orders of both PSD and MSD; and that for any two prospects under certain conditions, their third order MSD preference will be ???the opposite??? of or ???the same??? as their counterpart third order PSD preference. By extending Levy and Levy's work, we provide investors with more tools for empirical analysis, with which they can identify the first order PSD and MSD prospects and discern arbitrage opportunities that could increase his/her utility as well as wealth and set up a zero dollar portfolio to make huge profit. Our tools also enable investors to identify the third order PSD and MSD prospects and make better choices.

Download Info
To download:

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. Information about this may be contained in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/eco/research/papers/2005/0805markowitzstochasticdominance.pdf
File Format: application/pdf
File Function:
Download Restriction: no

Publisher Info
Paper provided by Monash University, Department of Economics in its series Monash Economics Working Papers with number 08/05.

Download reference. The following formats are available: HTML (with abstract), plain text (with abstract), BibTeX, RIS (EndNote, RefMan, ProCite), ReDIF
Length: 36 pages
Date of creation: 03 May 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:mos:moswps:2005-08

Contact details of provider:
Postal: Department of Economics, Monash University, Victoria 3800, Australia
Phone: +61-3-9905-2493
Fax: +61-3-9905-5476
Email:
Web page: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/eco/
More information through EDIRC

Order Information:
Email:
Web: http://www.buseco.monash.edu.au/eco/research/papers/

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its listing, contact: (Simon Angus).

Related research
Keywords: Prospect stochastic dominance; Markowitz stochastic dominance; risk seeking; risk averse; S-shaped utility function; reverse S-shaped utility function;

Other versions of this item:

This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports: References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
  1. Fong, Wai Mun & Wong, Wing Keung & Lean, Hooi Hooi, 2005. "International momentum strategies: a stochastic dominance approach," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 89-109, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  2. Fishburn, Peter C., 1974. "Convex stochastic dominance with continuous distribution functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 7(2), pages 143-158, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  3. Whitmore, G A, 1970. "Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 60(3), pages 457-59, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  4. Camerer, Colin & Babcock, Linda & Loewenstein, George & Thaler, Richard, 1996. "Labor Supply of New York City Cab Drivers: One Day At A time," Working Papers 960, California Institute of Technology, Division of the Humanities and Social Sciences. [Downloadable!]
    Other versions:
  5. Broll, Udo & Wahl, Jack E. & Wong, Wing-Keung, 2006. "Elasticity of risk aversion and international trade," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 126-130, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  6. Matthew Rabin., 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Economics Working Papers E00-279, University of California at Berkeley. [Downloadable!]
  7. Wong, Wing-Keung & Bian, Guorui, 2005. "Estimating parameters in autoregressive models with asymmetric innovations," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 71(1), pages 61-70, January. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  8. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56, pages 279. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  9. Kobberling, Veronika & Wakker, Peter P., 2005. "An index of loss aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 119-131, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  10. Ng Yew Kwang, 1965. "Why do People Buy Lottery Tickets? Choices Involving Risk and the Indivisibility of Expenditure," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 73, pages 530. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  11. Jarrow, Robert, 1986. " The Relationship between Arbitrage and First Order Stochastic Dominance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 41(4), pages 915-21, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  12. Mei Wang & Paul S. Fischbeck, 2004. "Incorporating Framing into Prospect Theory Modeling: A Mixture-Model Approach," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 29(2), pages 181-197, 09. [Downloadable!]
  13. Thierry Post & Haim Levy, 2002. "Does Risk Seeking drive Asset Prices?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 02-070/2, Tinbergen Institute. [Downloadable!]
  14. Wong, Wing-Keung & Li, Chi-Kwong, 1999. "A note on convex stochastic dominance," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 62(3), pages 293-300, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  15. Benartzi, Shlomo & Thaler, Richard H, 1995. "Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 110(1), pages 73-92, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  16. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1971. "Increasing risk II: Its economic consequences," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(1), pages 66-84, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  17. Levy, Haim & Wiener, Zvi, 1998. "Stochastic Dominance and Prospect Dominance with Subjective Weighting Functions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 147-63, May-June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  18. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang & Tano Santos, 2001. "Prospect Theory And Asset Prices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 116(1), pages 1-53, February. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  19. Matthew Rabin, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series 1034, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley. [Downloadable!]
  20. Myagkov, Mikhail & Plott, Charles R, 1997. "Exchange Economies and Loss Exposure: Experiments Exploring Prospect Theory and Competitive Equilibria in Market Environments," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 87(5), pages 801-28, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  21. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  22. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. " Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
  23. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-48, December. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  24. Machina, Mark J & Schmeidler, David, 1992. "A More Robust Definition of Subjective Probability," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 60(4), pages 745-80, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
    Other versions:
  25. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R., 1971. "Stochastic dominance and diversification," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 288-305, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  26. Hanoch, G & Levy, Haim, 1969. "The Efficiency Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 36(107), pages 335-46, July. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  27. Meyer, Jack, 1977. "Second Degree Stochastic Dominance with Respect to a Function," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 18(2), pages 477-87, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  28. Bawa, Vijay S., 1978. "Safety-First, Stochastic Dominance, and Optimal Portfolio Choice," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 13(02), pages 255-271, June. [Downloadable!]
  29. Thaler, Richard H, et al, 1997. "The Effect of Myopia and Loss Aversion on Risk Taking: An Experimental Test," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 112(2), pages 647-61, May.
  30. Hersh Shefrin & Meir Statman, 1993. "Behavioral Aspects of the Design and Marketing of Financial Products," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 22(2), Summer.
  31. Tesfatsion, Leigh, 1976. "Stochastic Dominance and the Maximization of Expected Utility," Review of Economic Studies, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 43(2), pages 301-15, June. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  32. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "The Utility of Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60, pages 151. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  33. Anderson, Gordon, 2004. "Toward an empirical analysis of polarization," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 122(1), pages 1-26, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  34. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  35. Chip Heath & Steven Huddart & Mark Lang, 1999. "Psychological Factors And Stock Option Exercise," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 114(2), pages 601-627, May. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
  36. Matthew Rabin, 2000. "Risk Aversion and Expected-Utility Theory: A Calibration Theorem," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 68(5), pages 1281-1292, September.
  37. Haim Levy, 2004. "Prospect Theory and Mean-Variance Analysis," Review of Financial Studies, Oxford University Press for Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(4), pages 1015-1041. [Downloadable!] (restricted)
Full references

Statistics
Access and download statistics

Did you know? RePEc encourages publishers to make their bibliographic data freely available to the public.

This page was last updated on 2009-11-25.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Department of Economics, College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, University of Connecticut using RePEc data on a server sponsored by the Society for Economic Dynamics.