IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1302.4679.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Rationalizing Investors Choice

Author

Listed:
  • Carole Bernard
  • Jit Seng Chen
  • Steven Vanduffel

Abstract

Assuming that agents' preferences satisfy first-order stochastic dominance, we show how the Expected Utility paradigm can rationalize all optimal investment choices: the optimal investment strategy in any behavioral law-invariant (state-independent) setting corresponds to the optimum for an expected utility maximizer with an explicitly derived concave non-decreasing utility function. This result enables us to infer the utility and risk aversion of agents from their investment choice in a non-parametric way. We relate the property of decreasing absolute risk aversion (DARA) to distributional properties of the terminal wealth and of the financial market. Specifically, we show that DARA is equivalent to a demand for a terminal wealth that has more spread than the opposite of the log pricing kernel at the investment horizon.

Suggested Citation

  • Carole Bernard & Jit Seng Chen & Steven Vanduffel, 2013. "Rationalizing Investors Choice," Papers 1302.4679, arXiv.org, revised Jan 2014.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1302.4679
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1302.4679
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philip H. Dybvig, 1988. "Inefficient Dynamic Portfolio Strategies or How to Throw Away a Million Dollars in the Stock Market," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, pages 67-88.
    2. Carole Bernard & Franck Moraux & Ludger Rüschendorf & Steven Vanduffel, 2015. "Optimal payoffs under state-dependent preferences," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(7), pages 1157-1173, July.
    3. Mark Bagnoli & Ted Bergstrom, 2005. "Log-concave probability and its applications," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), pages 445-469.
    4. Birnbaum, Michael H & Navarrete, Juan B, 1998. "Testing Descriptive Utility Theories: Violations of Stochastic Dominance and Cumulative Independence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 17(1), pages 49-78, October.
    5. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "Portfolio Selection," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 7(1), pages 77-91, March.
    6. Thorsten Hens & Christian Reichlin, 2013. "Three Solutions to the Pricing Kernel Puzzle," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 17(3), pages 1065-1098.
    7. Merton, Robert C., 1971. "Optimum consumption and portfolio rules in a continuous-time model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 373-413, December.
    8. Green, Richard C. & Srivastava, Sanjay, 1986. "Expected utility maximization and demand behavior," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 313-323, April.
    9. Chen, An & Pelsser, Antoon & Vellekoop, Michel, 2011. "Modeling non-monotone risk aversion using SAHARA utility functions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 146(5), pages 2075-2092, September.
    10. Dybvig, Philip H, 1988. "Distributional Analysis of Portfolio Choice," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(3), pages 369-393, July.
    11. Carole Bernard & Phelim P. Boyle & Steven Vanduffel, 2014. "Explicit Representation of Cost-Efficient Strategies," Finance, Presses universitaires de Grenoble, vol. 35(2), pages 5-55.
    12. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
    13. Haim Levy, 2008. "First Degree Stochastic Dominance Violations: Decision Weights and Bounded Rationality," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(528), pages 759-774, April.
    14. Ryan, Matthew J., 2006. "Risk aversion in RDEU," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 675-697, September.
    15. Chateauneuf, Alain & Wakker, Peter, 1999. "An Axiomatization of Cumulative Prospect Theory for Decision under Risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 137-145, August.
    16. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    17. Peleg, Bezalel & Yaari, M E, 1975. "A Price Characterization of Efficient Random Variables," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 43(2), pages 283-292, March.
    18. Enrico Giorgi & Thorsten Hens, 2006. "Making prospect theory fit for finance," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 20(3), pages 339-360, September.
    19. Carole Bernard & Jit Seng Chen & Steven Vanduffel, 2014. "Optimal portfolios under worst-case scenarios," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 657-671, April.
    20. 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.
    21. Bernard, Carole & Ghossoub, Mario, 2009. "Static Portfolio Choice under Cumulative Prospect Theory," MPRA Paper 15446, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    22. Fousseni Chabi-Yo & René Garcia & Eric Renault, 2008. "State Dependence Can Explain the Risk Aversion Puzzle," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(2), pages 973-1011, April.
    23. Dybvig, Philip H & Rogers, L C G, 1997. "Recovery of Preferences from Observed Wealth in a Single Realization," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 10(1), pages 151-174.
    24. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    25. Dybvig, Philip H. & Wang, Yajun, 2012. "Increases in risk aversion and the distribution of portfolio payoffs," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 147(3), pages 1222-1246.
    26. Manel Baucells & Franz H. Heukamp, 2006. "Stochastic Dominance and Cumulative Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, pages 1409-1423.
    27. Daniel G. Goldstein & Eric J. Johnson & William F. Sharpe, 2008. "Choosing Outcomes versus Choosing Products: Consumer-Focused Retirement Investment Advice," Journal of Consumer Research, Oxford University Press, vol. 35(3), pages 440-456, August.
    28. Moshe Levy & Haim Levy, 2002. "Prospect Theory: Much Ado About Nothing?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 48(10), pages 1334-1349, October.
    29. Carole Bernard & Steven Vanduffel, 2014. "Financial Bounds for Insurance Claims," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 81(1), pages 27-56, March.
    30. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2008. "Stocks as Lotteries: The Implications of Probability Weighting for Security Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2066-2100, December.
    31. Matthew Polisson & John K.-H. Quah, 2013. "Revealed preference tests under risk and uncertainty," Discussion Papers in Economics 13/24, Department of Economics, University of Leicester.
    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. Fajardo, José & Corcuera, José Manuel & Menouken Pamen, Olivier, 2016. "On the optimal investment," MPRA Paper 71901, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Jacek B Krawczyk, 2015. "Delivering Left-Skewed Portfolio Payoff Distributions in the Presence of Transaction Costs," Risks, MDPI, Open Access Journal, vol. 3(3), pages 1-20, August.

    More about this item

    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:1302.4679. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (arXiv administrators). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.