IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/chf/rpseri/rp0721.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Financial Market Equilibria With Cumulative Prospect Therory

Author

Listed:
  • Enrico De Giorgi

    (University of Lugano and Swiss Finance Institute)

  • Thorsten Hens

    (University of Zurich)

  • Marc Oliver Rieger

    (University of Zurich)

Abstract

The paper shows that financial market equilibria need not exist if agents possess cumulative prospect theory preferences with piecewise-power value functions. The reason is an infinite short-selling problem. But even when a short-sell constraint is added, non-existence can occur due to discontinuities in agents demand functions. Existence of equilibria is established when short-sales constraints are imposed and there is also a continuum of agents in the market.

Suggested Citation

  • Enrico De Giorgi & Thorsten Hens & Marc Oliver Rieger, 2007. "Financial Market Equilibria With Cumulative Prospect Therory," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 07-21, Swiss Finance Institute, revised Aug 2007.
  • Handle: RePEc:chf:rpseri:rp0721
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ssrn.com/abstract=985539
    Download Restriction: no

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Schmeidler, David, 1969. "Competitive Equilibria in Markets with a Continuum of Traders and Incomplete Preferences," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 37(4), pages 578-585, October.
    2. Jagannathan, Ravi & Wang, Zhenyu, 1996. " The Conditional CAPM and the Cross-Section of Expected Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(1), pages 3-53, March.
    3. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 110(1), pages 73-92.
    4. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang & Tano Santos, 2001. "Prospect Theory and Asset Prices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 116(1), pages 1-53.
    9. Allouch, Nizar & Le Van, Cuong & Page, Frank Jr., 2006. "Arbitrage and equilibrium in unbounded exchange economies with satiation," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(6), pages 661-674, September.
    10. Hanqing Jin & Xun Yu Zhou, 2008. "Behavioral Portfolio Selection In Continuous Time," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 385-426.
    11. Yamazaki, Akira, 1978. "An Equilibrium Existence Theorem without Convexity Assumptions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 46(3), pages 541-555, May.
    12. Werner, Jan, 1987. "Arbitrage and the Existence of Competitive Equilibrium," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(6), pages 1403-1418, November.
    13. Jonathan Ingersoll, 2008. "Non-Monotonicity of the Tversky-Kahneman Probability-Weighting Function: A Cautionary Note," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 14(3), pages 385-390.
    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. Guo, Jing & He, Xue Dong, 2017. "Equilibrium asset pricing with Epstein-Zin and loss-averse investors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 86-108.
    2. Curatola, Giuliano, 2015. "Loss aversion, habit formation and the term structures of equity and interest rates," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 103-122.
    3. De Giorgi, Enrico G. & Legg, Shane, 2012. "Dynamic portfolio choice and asset pricing with narrow framing and probability weighting," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 951-972.
    4. Matteo Del Vigna, 2011. "Market equilibrium with heterogeneous behavioural and classical investors' preferences," Working Papers - Mathematical Economics 2011-09, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    5. repec:eee:econom:v:198:y:2017:i:2:p:253-270 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Toomas Hinnosaar, 2015. "On the impossibility of protecting risk-takers," Carlo Alberto Notebooks 404, Collegio Carlo Alberto.
    7. Vicky Henderson, 2012. "Prospect Theory, Liquidation, and the Disposition Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 445-460, February.
    8. Dorsaf Ben Aissia, 2016. "Developments in non-expected utility theories: an empirical study of risk aversion," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 40(2), pages 299-318, April.
    9. repec:wsi:qjfxxx:v:07:y:2017:i:02:n:s201013921750001x is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Matteo Del Vigna, 2011. "Financial market equilibria with heterogeneous agents: CAPM and market segmentation," Working Papers - Mathematical Economics 2011-08, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    11. Bernard, Carole & Ghossoub, Mario, 2009. "Static Portfolio Choice under Cumulative Prospect Theory," MPRA Paper 15446, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Li, Yan & Yang, Liyan, 2013. "Prospect theory, the disposition effect, and asset prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 715-739.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cumulative prospect theory; general equilibrium model; non-convex preferences; continuum of agents;

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty

    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:chf:rpseri:rp0721. 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: (Marilyn Barja). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/chfeech.html .

    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.