How does beta explain stochastic dominance efficiency?
Stochastic dominance rules provide necessary and sufficient conditions for characterizing efficient portfolios that suit all expected utility maximizers. For the finance practitioner, though, these conditions are not easy to apply or interpret. Portfolio selection models like the mean-variance model offer intuitive investment rules that are easy to understand, as they are based on parameters of risk and return. We present stochastic dominance rules for portfolio choices that can be interpreted in terms of simple financial concepts of systematic risk and mean return. Stochastic dominance is expressed in terms of Lorenz curves, and systematic risk is expressed in terms of Gini. To accommodate risk aversion differentials across investors, we expand the conditions using the extended Gini.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. 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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Volume (Year): 35 (2010)
Issue (Month): 4 (November)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://springer.com|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.springer.com/finance/journal/11156/PS2|
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.:
- Haim Shalit & Shlomo Yitzhaki, 2003. "An Asset Allocation Puzzle: Comment," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(3), pages 1002-1008, June.
- Shalit, Haim & Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 2002. "Estimating Beta," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 95-118, March.
- Samuel Kotz & Christian Kleiber, 2002. "A characterization of income distributions in terms of generalized Gini coefficients," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 19(4), pages 789-794.
- Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
- Ronald Best & Charles Hodges & James Yoder, 2006. "Expected earnings growth and portfolio performance," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 26(4), pages 431-437, June.
- Shorrocks, Anthony F, 1983. "Ranking Income Distributions," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 50(197), pages 3-17, February.
- Thierry Post, 2003. "Empirical Tests for Stochastic Dominance Efficiency," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 58(5), pages 1905-1932, October.
- Haim Levy, 1992. "Stochastic Dominance and Expected Utility: Survey and Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 555-593, April.
- Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 1983. "On an Extension of the Gini Inequality Index," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 24(3), pages 617-628, October.
- G. Hanoch & H. Levy, 1969. "The Efficiency Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 36(3), pages 335-346.
- Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
- Haim Shalit & Shlomo Yitzhaki, 2009. "Capital market equilibrium with heterogeneous investors," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(6), pages 757-766.
- Carroll, Carolyn & Thistle, Paul D. & Wei, K. C. John, 1992. "The Robustness of Risk-Return Nonlinearities to the Normality Assumption," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 27(03), pages 419-435, September.
- Thistle, Paul D., 1993. "Negative Moments, Risk Aversion, and Stochastic Dominance," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 28(02), pages 301-311, June.
- Samuelson, Paul A., 1967. "General Proof that Diversification Pays," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(01), pages 1-13, March.
- Dentcheva, Darinka & Ruszczynski, Andrzej, 2006.
"Portfolio optimization with stochastic dominance constraints,"
Journal of Banking & Finance,
Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 433-451, February.
- Darinka Dentcheva & Andrzej Ruszczynski, 2004. "Portfolio Optimization With Stochastic Dominance Constraints," Finance 0402016, EconWPA, revised 02 Mar 2006.
- Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
- Haim Shalit & Shlomo Yitzhaki, 1994. "Marginal Conditional Stochastic Dominance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(5), pages 670-684, May.
- Yitzhaki, Shlomo, 1982. "Stochastic Dominance, Mean Variance, and Gini's Mean Difference," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 178-185, March.
- Rolf Aaberge, 2000. "Characterizations of Lorenz curves and income distributions," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 17(4), pages 639-653.
- Andrzej Ruszczynski & Robert J. Vanderbei, 2003. "Frontiers of Stochastically Nondominated Portfolios," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 71(4), pages 1287-1297, 07. Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)