IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Asset Pricing Under Keeping Up With the Joneses and Heterogeneous Beliefs



When agents agree to disagree about the expected growth rate of the aggregate endowment process, we study the asset price dynamics under "Keeping up with the Joneses" (KUJ) meaning that each agent maximizes the expected life-time CRRA utility of his relative consumption to the other agent in the economy. By solving the optimal consumption policies analytically, we obtain the market equilibrium under heterogeneous beliefs. We provide conditions for agents' long-run survival and show that the market price of risk, risk-free rate, price-dividend ratio in market equilibrium are the consumption share weighted averages of these variables under each agent's belief. We also show the cyclical behaviour of Sharpe ratio, risk-free rate, price and dividend ratio and stock volatility. Through Monte Carlo simulations, we find that, when the less risk averse agent is relatively optimistic, allowing a small amount of disagreement between agents can explain many market characterizes including excess volatility, a high equity premium and a low risk-free rate identified in financial markets.

Suggested Citation

  • Xue-Zhong He & Lei Shi & Min Zheng, 2012. "Asset Pricing Under Keeping Up With the Joneses and Heterogeneous Beliefs," Research Paper Series 302, Quantitative Finance Research Centre, University of Technology, Sydney.
  • Handle: RePEc:uts:rpaper:302

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Masahiro Watanabe, 2008. "Price Volatility and Investor Behavior in an Overlapping Generations Model with Information Asymmetry," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 63(1), pages 229-272, February.
    2. Elyès Jouini & Clotilde Napp, 2007. "Consensus Consumer and Intertemporal Asset Pricing with Heterogeneous Beliefs," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 74(4), pages 1149-1174.
    3. repec:dau:papers:123456789/341 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. John Y. Campbell & John H. Cochrane, 1994. "By force of habit: a consumption-based explanation of aggregate stock market behavior," Working Papers 94-17, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    5. Elyès Jouini & Clotilde Napp, 2010. "Unbiased Disagreement in Financial Markets, Waves of Pessimism and the Risk-Return Trade-off," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 15(3), pages 575-601.
    6. Clotilde Napp & Elyès Jouini, 2006. "Heterogeneous Beliefs and Asset Pricing in Discrete Time," Post-Print halshs-00151536, HAL.
    7. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
    8. H. Henry Cao & Hui Ou-Yang, 2009. "Differences of Opinion of Public Information and Speculative Trading in Stocks and Options," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(1), pages 299-335, January.
    9. Costas Xiouros & Fernando Zapatero, 2010. "The Representative Agent of an Economy with External Habit Formation and Heterogeneous Risk Aversion," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(8), pages 3017-3047, August.
    10. Harrison Hong & Jeremy C. Stein, 2007. "Disagreement and the Stock Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 109-128, Spring.
    11. Andrea Buraschi & Alexei Jiltsov, 2006. "Model Uncertainty and Option Markets with Heterogeneous Beliefs," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(6), pages 2841-2897, December.
    12. Giordani, Paolo & Soderlind, Paul, 2006. "Is there evidence of pessimism and doubt in subjective distributions? Implications for the equity premium puzzle," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 1027-1043, June.
    13. repec:dau:papers:123456789/78 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:


    Access and download statistics


    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:uts:rpaper:302. 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: (Duncan Ford). General contact details of provider: .

    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.