IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Consistent Measures of Risk

  • Casper G. de Vries
  • Mandira Sarma
  • Bjørn N. Jorgensen
  • Jean-Pierre Zigrand

    ()

  • Jon Danielsson

    ()

In this paper we compare overall as well as downside risk measures with respect to the criteria of first and second order stochastic dominance. While the downside risk measures, with the exception of tail conditional expectation, are consistent with first order stochastic dominance, overall risk measures are not, even if we restrict ourselves to two-parameter distributions. Most common risk measures preserve consistent preference orderings between prospects under the second order stochastic dominance rule, although for some of the downside risk measures such consistency holds deep enough in the tail only. Infact, the partial order induced by many risk measures is equivalent to sosd. Tail conditional expectation is not consistent with respect to second order stochastic dominance. In this paper we compare overall as well as downside risk measures with respect to the criteria of first and second order stochastic dominance. While the downside risk measures, with the exception of tail conditional expectation, are consistent with first order stochastic dominance, overall risk measures are not, even if we restrict ourselves to two-parameter distributions. Most common risk measures preserve consistent preference orderings between prospects under the second order stochastic dominance rule, although for some of the downside risk measures such consistency holds deep enough in the tail only. Infact, the partial order induced by many risk measures is equivalent to sosd. Tail conditional expectation is not consistent with respect to second order stochastic dominance.KEY WORDS: stochastic dominance, risk measures, preference ordering,utility theoryJEL Classification: D81, G00, G11

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.

File URL: http://www.lse.ac.uk/fmg/workingPapers/discussionPapers/fmgdps/dp565.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by Financial Markets Group in its series FMG Discussion Papers with number dp565.

as
in new window

Length:
Date of creation: May 2006
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:fmg:fmgdps:dp565
Contact details of provider: Web page: http://www.lse.ac.uk/fmg/

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.:

as in new window
  1. Bawa, Vijay S., 1975. "Optimal rules for ordering uncertain prospects," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 2(1), pages 95-121, March.
  2. Casper G. de Vries & Gennady Samorodnitsky & Bjørn N. Jorgensen & Sarma Mandira & Jon Danielsson, 2005. "Subadditivity Re–Examined: the Case for Value-at-Risk," FMG Discussion Papers dp549, Financial Markets Group.
  3. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
  4. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
  5. De Giorgi, Enrico, 2005. "Reward-risk portfolio selection and stochastic dominance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 895-926, April.
  6. Carlo Acerbi & Dirk Tasche, 2001. "On the coherence of Expected Shortfall," Papers cond-mat/0104295, arXiv.org, revised May 2002.
  7. Fishburn, Peter C, 1977. "Mean-Risk Analysis with Risk Associated with Below-Target Returns," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 67(2), pages 116-26, March.
  8. Philippe Artzner & Freddy Delbaen & Jean-Marc Eber & David Heath, 1999. "Coherent Measures of Risk," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 203-228.
  9. Tesfatsion, Leigh, 1976. "Stochastic Dominance and the Maximization of Expected Utility," Review of Economic Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 43(2), pages 301-15, June.
  10. Carlo Acerbi & Claudio Nordio & Carlo Sirtori, 2001. "Expected Shortfall as a Tool for Financial Risk Management," Papers cond-mat/0102304, arXiv.org.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fmg:fmgdps:dp565. 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: (The FMG Administration)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.