IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/rtr/wpaper/0050.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Portfolio Selection with minimum transaction lots: an approach with dual expected utility

Author

Listed:
  • Marisa Cenci
  • Floriana Filippini

Abstract

In this paper we analyse the portfolio selectionproblem with minimum transactionlots in the context of non-expected utility theory. We assume that the decisionmaker ranks the alternatives by using a specific DualExpectedUtility. This functionallows portfolio values less or equal a fixed benchmark tobe weighted inadifferent way from values greater than the fixedbenchmark. Under normallydistributedreturns and opportunechoice ofthe benchmark, the suggested approach leads to an NP-complete problemandhas the advantage ofusing mixed linear programming to obtainthe optimal portfolio. We also show resultsobtained by implementing the model on the Italian stock market. (keywords: dual expectedutility, portfolio selection, NP-completeness, linear programming with mixed variables)

Suggested Citation

  • Marisa Cenci & Floriana Filippini, 2005. "Portfolio Selection with minimum transaction lots: an approach with dual expected utility," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0050, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    • Handle: RePEc:rtr:wpaper:0050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://host.uniroma3.it/dipartimenti/economia/pdf/wp50.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Floriana Filippini & Marisa Cenci, 2005. "Portfolio selection: a linear approach with dual expected utility," Departmental Working Papers of Economics - University 'Roma Tre' 0048, Department of Economics - University Roma Tre.
    2. Wang, Shaun S. & Young, Virginia R., 1998. "Ordering risks: Expected utility theory versus Yaari's dual theory of risk," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 145-161, June.
    3. 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.
    4. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1991. "Loss Aversion in Riskless Choice: A Reference-Dependent Model," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 106(4), pages 1039-1061.
    5. Benati, Stefano, 2003. "The optimal portfolio problem with coherent risk measure constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(3), pages 572-584, November.
    6. Mansini, Renata & Speranza, Maria Grazia, 1999. "Heuristic algorithms for the portfolio selection problem with minimum transaction lots," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 219-233, April.
    7. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    8. Hadar, Josef & Seo, Tae Kun, 1995. "Asset diversification in Yaari's dual theory," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 1171-1180, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wakker, Peter P. & Zank, Horst, 2002. "A simple preference foundation of cumulative prospect theory with power utility," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(7), pages 1253-1271, July.
    2. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2012. "A test of independence of discounting from quality of life," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 31(1), pages 22-34.
    3. Uriel Procaccia & Uzi Segal, 2003. "Super Majoritarianism and the Endowment Effect," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 55(3), pages 181-207, November.
    4. Mariya Burdina & Scott Hiller, 2021. "When Falling Just Short is a Good Thing: The Effect of Past Performance on Improvement," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 22(7), pages 777-798, October.
    5. Klein, Martin & Deissenroth, Marc, 2017. "When do households invest in solar photovoltaics? An application of prospect theory," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 270-278.
    6. Wang, Suxin & Rong, Ximin & Zhao, Hui, 2019. "Optimal investment and benefit payment strategy under loss aversion for target benefit pension plans," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 346(C), pages 205-218.
    7. A. Peter McGraw & Eldar Shafir & Alexander Todorov, 2010. "Valuing Money and Things: Why a $20 Item Can Be Worth More and Less Than $20," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(5), pages 816-830, May.
    8. Bowman, David & Minehart, Deborah & Rabin, Matthew, 1999. "Loss aversion in a consumption-savings model," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 38(2), pages 155-178, February.
    9. Joost M. E. Pennings & Ale Smidts, 2003. "The Shape of Utility Functions and Organizational Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 49(9), pages 1251-1263, September.
    10. Birnbaum, Michael H. & Zimmermann, Jacqueline M., 1998. "Buying and Selling Prices of Investments: Configural Weight Model of Interactions Predicts Violations of Joint Independence," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 74(2), pages 145-187, May.
    11. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    12. Fershtman, Chaim, 1996. "On the value of incumbency managerial reference points and loss aversion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 17(2), pages 245-257, April.
    13. Oliver, Adam, 2003. "The internal consistency of the standard gamble: tests after adjusting for prospect theory," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 159, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    14. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    15. Pieter Balcaen & Cind Du Bois & Caroline Buts, 2021. "The Hybridisation of Conflict: A Prospect Theoretic Analysis," Games, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-15, October.
    16. Niu, Weining & Zeng, Qingduo, 2018. "Corporate financing with loss aversion and disagreement," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 80-90.
    17. Bottom, William P., 1998. "Negotiator Risk: Sources of Uncertainty and the Impact of Reference Points on Negotiated Agreements," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 89-112, November.
    18. Arthur E. Attema & Marieke Krol & Job Exel & Werner B. F. Brouwer, 2018. "New findings from the time trade-off for income approach to elicit willingness to pay for a quality adjusted life year," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 19(2), pages 277-291, March.
    19. Visser, Martine & Jumare, Hafsah & Brick, Kerri, 2020. "Risk preferences and poverty traps in the uptake of credit and insurance amongst small-scale farmers in South Africa," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 180(C), pages 826-836.
    20. repec:cup:judgdm:v:16:y:2021:i:6:p:1324-1369 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Zuzana Gocmanová & Jaromír Skorkovský & Štěpán Veselý & Jan Böhm, 2019. "Where Do You Want to Go Skiing? The Effect of the Reference Point and Loss Aversion," Acta Universitatis Agriculturae et Silviculturae Mendelianae Brunensis, Mendel University Press, vol. 67(1), pages 243-252.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    dual expected utility; portfolio selection; NP-completeness; linear programming with;
    All these keywords.

    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:rtr:wpaper:0050. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    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 bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Telephone for information (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dero3it.html .

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.