Risk taking with additive and multiplicative background risks

We examine the effects of background risks on optimal portfolio choice. Examples of background risks include uncertain labor income, uncertainty about the terminal value of fixed assets such as housing and uncertainty about future tax liabilities. While some of these risks are additive and have been amply studied, others are multiplicative in nature and have received far less attention. The simultaneous effect of both additive and multiplicative risks has hitherto not received attention and can explain some paradoxical choice behavior. We rationalize such behavior and show how background risks might lead to seemingly U-shaped relative risk aversion for a representative investor.     

Representative consumer's risk aversion and efficient risk-sharing rules

We study the representative consumer's risk attitude and efficient risk-sharing rules in a single-period, single-good economy in which consumers have homogeneous probabilistic beliefs but heterogeneous risk attitudes. We prove that if all consumers have convex absolute risk tolerance, so must the representative consumer. We also identify a relationship between the curvature of an individual consumer's individual risk sharing rule and his absolute cautiousness, the first derivative of absolute risk-tolerance. Furthermore, we discuss some consequences of these results and refinements of these results for the class of HARA utility functions.     

Production and insurance under regret aversion

This paper examines the behavior of a regret-averse producer facing revenue risk. To insure against the revenue risk, the producer can purchase a coinsurance contract with an endogenously chosen coinsurance rate. Regret-averse preferences are characterized by a utility function that includes disutility from having chosen ex-post suboptimal alternatives. We show that the regret-averse producer never fully insures against the revenue risk even though the coinsurance contract is actuarially fair. When the producer is sufficiently regret averse and the loss probability is high, we further show that the regret-averse producer chooses not to purchase the actuarially fair coinsurance contract. Even when purchasing the actuarially fair coinsurance contract is optimal, we derive sufficient conditions under which the regret-averse producer reduces the optimal output level as compared to that without the coinsurance contract. These results are distinct from those under pure risk aversion, thereby making the consideration of regret aversion crucial.     

Optimal annuitization, uncertain survival probabilities, and maxmin preferences

We consider a life-cycle model with bequest motives, and assume that the individual does not know his/her survival probability and has maxmin utility preferences; we show that it is optimal not to annuitize but to purchase pure life insurance policies instead.     

Observational equivalence and nonequivalence of subjective and robust mean–variance preferences

We identify the conditions where robust mean–variance preferences, which capture ambiguity aversion, are observationally nonequivalent to subjective mean–variance preferences. Conversely, we also provide an example showing that observational equivalence holds regardless of the degree of ambiguity aversion.     

Regret aversion and opportunity dependence

This paper provides an axiomatic model of decision making under uncertainty in which the decision maker is driven by anticipated ex post regrets. Our model allows both regret aversion and likelihood judgement over states to coexist. Also, we characterize two special cases, minimax regret with multiple priors that generalizes Savage's minimax regret, and a smooth model of regret aversion.     

Greater prudence and greater downside risk aversion

Variation in the degree of downside risk aversion across decision makers has implications for efficient risk sharing. However, except for small differences in risk preferences, there is no index, analogous to the Arrow-Pratt index of risk aversion, that depends only on local properties of the utility function and indicates the degree of aversion to downside risk. A measure that does depend only on local properties of the utility function u, the index of prudence p=−u^?/u^″, is related to downside risk aversion, which is indicated by a positive value for u^?. Although we show that the degree of prudence is not an accurate indicator of the degree of downside risk aversion, we nonetheless demonstrate that a uniform increase in prudence accompanied by a uniform increase (decrease) in risk aversion is sufficient to indicate greater downside risk aversion, provided prudence is greater (less) than three times the degree of risk aversion.     

Mean-dispersion preferences and constant absolute uncertainty aversion

We axiomatize, in an Anscombe–Aumann framework, the class of preferences that admit a representation of the form V(f)=μ−ρ(d)$V(f)=\mu -\rho (d)$, where μ is the mean utility of the act f with respect to a given probability, d   is the vector of state-by-state utility deviations from the mean, and ρ(d)$\rho (d)$ is a measure of (aversion to) dispersion that corresponds to an uncertainty premium. The key feature of these mean-dispersion   preferences is that they exhibit constant absolute uncertainty aversion. This class includes many well-known models of preferences from the literature on ambiguity. We show what properties of the dispersion function ρ(⋅)$\rho (\cdot )$ correspond to known models, to probabilistic sophistication, and to some new notions of uncertainty aversion.     

Portfolio choice, attention allocation, and price comovement

This paper models the attention allocation of portfolio investors. Investors choose the composition of their information subject to an information flow constraint. Given their expected investment strategy in the next period, which is to hold a diversified portfolio, in equilibrium investors choose to observe one linear combination of asset payoffs as a private signal. When investors use this private signal to update information about two assets, changes in one asset affect both asset prices and may lead to asset price comovement. The model also has implications for the transmission of volatility shocks between two assets.     

“Fair go” for all? Wealth and Risk Aversion of Australian Households*

A mean‐variance framework is applied to Australian household financial portfolios in order to provide estimates of relative risk aversion in the economy. Controlling for various socio‐economic characteristics, we explore whether risk aversion heterogeneity is a function of wealth heterogeneity. In contrast to most studies, we find evidence of very high risk aversion amongst the majority of households of poor households but vastly lower risk aversion amongst the high percentiles in the wealth distribution. Applying a first differences model across three survey waves spanning 2002 to 2010, we find that risk tolerance increases significantly with wealth. Risk tolerance is positively associated with mortgage payments, but rental payments have no relationship. In addition, we found no evidence that holding a university education has any discernible impact on risk aversion. Lastly, we present some preliminary findings as to the impact of financial advice on observed risk aversion. Financial advice is found to accentuating risk aversion, particularly amongst the wealthiest households. The findings have potential implications for the distribution of wealth in Australia that has received renewed interest recently.     

Convex and decreasing absolute risk aversion is proper

Proper risk aversion, a pivotal concept in the study of behavioral conditions on utility functions, states that an undesirable risk can never be made desirable by the presence of an independent risk. It is well known that standard risk aversion is sufficient for this concept. We show in this short article that convex and decreasing absolute risk aversion is an alternative sufficient condition.     

Effects of background risks on cautiousness with an application to a portfolio choice problem

We provide necessary and sufficient conditions on an individual's expected utility function under which any zero-mean idiosyncratic risk increases cautiousness (the derivative of the reciprocal of the absolute risk aversion), which is the key determinant for this individual's demand for options and portfolio insurance.     

A note on comparative downside risk aversion

We provide comparative global conditions for downside risk aversion, which are similar to the ones studied by Ross for risk aversion. We define a coefficient of downside risk aversion, and study its local properties.     

Greater downside risk aversion in the large

In this paper, we advance a definition of greater downside risk aversion that applies to both large and small changes in risk preference, and thereby complements the results for small changes reported previously. We show that a downside risk-averse transformation of a utility function results in a function that is more downside risk averse in the same manner that a risk-averse transformation increases risk aversion. Our demonstration is conducted first by using the compensated approach introduced by Diamond and Stiglitz [P. Diamond, J. Stiglitz, Increases in risk and in risk aversion, J. Econ. Theory 8 (1974) 337-360] and then by using an adaptation of the risk premium approach taken by Pratt [J. Pratt, Risk aversion in the small and in the large, Econometrica 32 (1964) 122-136].     

An optimal auction with correlated values and risk aversion

We consider an auction setting where the buyers are risk averse with correlated private valuations (CARA preferences, binary types), and characterize the optimal mechanism for a risk-neutral seller. We show that the optimal auction extracts all buyer surplus whenever the correlation is sufficiently strong (greater than 1/3 in absolute value), no matter how risk averse the buyers are. In contrast, we note that a sufficiently risk-averse seller would not use a full rent extracting mechanism for any positive correlation of the valuations even if the buyers were risk neutral.     

Loss aversion and market crashes

This study proposes a rational expectation equilibrium model of stock market crashes with information asymmetry and loss averse speculators. We obtain a state-dependent linear optimal trading strategy, which makes the equilibrium price tractable. The model predicts nonlinear market depth and the result that small shocks to fundamentals (e.g., supply or informational shocks) can cause abrupt price movements. We demonstrate that short-sale constraints intensify asset price collapses relative to upward movements. The model also generates contagion between uncorrelated assets. These results are consistent with the main puzzling features observed during market crashes, namely abrupt and asymmetric price movements that are not driven by major news events but coupled with a spillover effect between unrelated markets.     

Moment conditions for Almost Stochastic Dominance

This study establishes necessary conditions for Almost Stochastic Dominance criteria of various orders. These conditions take the form of restrictions on algebraic combinations of moments of the probability distributions in question. The relevant set of conditions depends on the relevant order of ASD but not on the critical value for the admissible violation area. These conditions can help to reduce the information requirement and computational burden in practical applications. A numerical example and an empirical application to historical stock market data illustrate the moment conditions. The first four moment conditions in particular seem appealing for many applications.     

An index of loss aversion

To a considerable extent, risk aversion as it is commonly observed is caused by loss aversion. Several indexes of loss aversion have been proposed in the literature. The one proposed in this paper leads to a clear decomposition of risk attitude into three distinct components: basic utility, probability weighting, and loss aversion. The index is independent of the unit of payment. The main theorem shows how the indexes of different decision makers can be compared through observed choices.     

Multi-objective private wealth allocation without subportfolios

As opposed to institutional investors, individual investors typically have several investment objectives in mind. The traditional utility maximization approach is not only oversimplified but also may not be suitable for real world application. Behavioral asset allocation divides a portfolio into subportfolios, which can cause potential problems. This paper follows the Modern Portfolio Theory and introduces the practical idea of treating some goals as constraints. How this works in practice is illustrated by an example of an individual having three different objectives. This article follows the idea of Chen et al. (2006) and includes life insurance. Consumption is modeled into three parts and accommodates a reasonable basis for calculating life insurance requirements and generally integrates consumption into the investment decision. As a whole, the model provides a customized solution for the environment and complex investment goals of an individual.     

Saving rates and portfolio choice with subsistence consumption

We analytically show that a common across rich/poor individuals Stone-Geary utility function with subsistence consumption in the context of a simple two-asset portfolio-choice model is capable of qualitatively and quantitatively explaining: (i) the higher saving rates of the rich, (ii) the higher fraction of personal wealth held in risky assets by the rich, and (iii) the higher volatility of consumption of the wealthier. On the contrary, time-variant “keeping-up-with-the-Joneses” weighted average consumption which plays the role of moving benchmark subsistence consumption gives the same portfolio composition and saving rates across the rich and the poor, failing to reconcile the model with what micro data say.