Information immobility,industry concentration,and institutional investors’ performance

This paper examines foreign institutional investors’ portfolio allocation and performance in US securities. We test how information immobility, proxied by information barriers between the investors’ home markets and the US, influences portfolio strategies. Consistent with theoretical predictions, foreign institutional investors’ total investment in the US is negatively related to information immobility. Similarly, information immobility is a significant driver of portfolio under-diversification across industries. Industry concentration has declined over time, consistent with declining search costs. Industry-concentrated portfolios outperform more diversified portfolios for both foreign and US institutional investors. Concentration especially helps institutional investors with the easiest access to information.     

Access to information and international portfolio allocation

We examine whether foreign equity holdings of portfolio investors depend on the level of information accessibility between the investors’ home and host countries. Using a comprehensive data set, alternative measures of information accessibility and robust analytical techniques, we show that differences in access to cross-country information significantly influence investors’ portfolio allocation decisions. Furthermore, the results suggest that for a given level of access to information, investors prefer to invest more in countries with a higher quality of legal/macro-institutions. Finally, the findings also confirm that the implications of information accessibility are more pronounced when markets are turbulent.     

Transparency in IPO mechanism: Retail investors’ participation,IPO pricing and returns

Using data from the transparent Indian IPO setting, the paper examines retail investors’ participation, their influence on IPO pricing and the returns they make on IPO investment. The transparency in the mechanism, which allows investors to observe prior investors’ participation, leads to demand which is concentrated at either one or two points of the offer price range. Analysis of investors’ demand during the offer period shows that the participation of retail investors is significantly influenced by the participation of institutional investors. We examine IPO pricing and find that favourable demand by retail investors is positively associated with a high IPO price even after controlling for demand by institutional investors. Further, we find that due to aggressive bidding by overconfident investors, retail investors are, on average, unlikely to make positive allocation weighted initial returns even in a setting where they do not have to compete with institutional investors. Retail investors, however, can earn significant positive allocation weighted initial returns if they limit their participation in IPOs with above average institutional investors’ demand.     

Decision-making under uncertainty – A field study of cumulative prospect theory

The presented research tests cumulative prospect theory (CPT, [Kahneman, D., Tversky, A., 1979. Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47, 263–291; Tversky, A., Kahneman, D., 1981. The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science 211, 453–480]) in the financial market, using US stock option data. Option prices possess information about actual investors’ preferences in such a way that an exploitation of conventional option analysis, along with theoretical relationships, makes it possible to elicit investor preferences. The option data in this study serve for estimating the two essential elements of the CPT, namely, the value function and the probability weighting function. The main part of the work focuses on the functions’ simultaneous estimation under CPT original parametric specification. The shape of the estimated functions is found to be in line with theory. Comparing to results of laboratory experiments, the estimated functions are closer to linearity and loss aversion is less pronounced.     

A Generalisation of the Mean-Variance Analysis

In this paper we consider a decision maker whose utility function has a kink at the reference point with different functions below and above this reference point. We also suppose that the decision maker generally distorts the objective probabilities. First we show that the expected utility function of this decision maker can be approximated by a function of mean and partial moments of distribution. This 'mean-partial moments' utility generalises not only mean-variance utility of Tobin and Markowitz, but also mean-semivariance utility of Markowitz. Then, in the spirit of Arrow and Pratt, we derive an expression for a risk premium when risk is small. Our analysis shows that a decision maker in this framework exhibits three types of aversions: aversion to loss, aversion to uncertainty in gains, and aversion to uncertainty in losses. Finally we present a solution to the optimal capital allocation problem and derive an expression for a portfolio performance measure which generalises the Sharpe and Sortino ratios. We demonstrate that in this framework the decision maker's skewness preferences have first-order impact on risk measurement even when the risk is small.     

Portfolio turnpike theorems for constant policies

This paper develops general overtaking techniques for studying the asymptotic properties of portfolio policies optimal with respect to a terminal utility valuation. For a restricted class of utility functions the sequence of optimal constant (non-revised) portfolio policies formed as the horizon recedes into the future is shown to converge. Furthermore, for utility functions unbounded above and below, this turnpike policy need not be the policy associated with the minimal constant relative risk aversion function that bounds the valuation function from above. Finally, an analogy between the portfolio turnpike problem and the turnpike problem of growth theory is studied.     

Time-varying risk aversion and asset prices

This paper uses a variant of the consumption-based representative agent model in Campbell and Cochrane [Campbell, J.Y., Cochrane, J.H., 1999. By force of habit: Consumption-based explanation of aggregate stock market behavior. Journal of Political Economy 107, 205–251] to study how investors’ time-varying risk aversion affects asset prices. First, we show that a countercyclical variation of risk aversion drives a procyclical conditional risk premium. Second, we show that with a small value for the volatility of the log surplus consumption ratio, a large value of risk aversion may not determine whether the equity premium and the risk-free rate puzzles can be resolved or not. Third, we show that countercyclical risk aversion may not help explain the predictability of long-horizon stock returns, the univariate mean-reversion of stock prices and the “leverage effect” in return volatility.     

Risk aversion and skewness preference

Empirically, co-skewness of asset returns seems to explain a substantial part of the cross-sectional variation of mean return not explained by beta. This finding is typically interpreted in terms of a risk averse representative investor with a cubic utility function. This paper questions this interpretation. We show that the empirical tests fail to impose risk aversion and the implied utility function takes an inverse S-shape. Unfortunately, the first-order conditions are not sufficient to guarantee that the market portfolio is the global maximum for this utility function, and our results suggest that the market portfolio is more likely to represent the global minimum. In addition, if we do impose risk aversion, then co-skewness has minimal explanatory power.     

Comparative statics and portfolio choices under the phantom decision model

This study characterizes attitudes toward uncertainty in the phantom decision model introduced by Izhakian and Izhakian (2015) and conducts a comparative statics analysis to examine how changes in phantom uncertainty and phantom aversion affect portfolio choices. First, “phantom averse” and “more phantom-averse” are defined in a manner that differs from Izhakian and Izhakian (2015). Assuming that utility functions have realization forms, the above notions are characterized by the shapes of their reduction components. For the portfolio choice problem that consists of one safe asset and one phantom asset, we derive sufficient conditions under which changes in phantom uncertainty and phantom aversion monotonically decrease the investment in the phantom asset. Some familiar concepts in expected utility theory are extended to the framework of the phantom decision model.     

The value of excess cash and corporate governance: Evidence from US cross-listings

We examine whether and how a US cross-listing mitigates the risk that insiders will turn their firm’s cash holdings into private benefits. We find strong evidence that the value investors attach to excess cash reserves is substantially larger for foreign firms listed on US exchanges and over-the-counter than for their domestic peers. Further, we show that this excess-cash premium stems not only from the strength of US legal rules and disclosure requirements, but also from the greater informal monitoring pressure that accompanies a US listing. Overall, because investors’ valuation of excess cash mirrors how they expect the cash to be used, our analysis shows that a US listing constrains insiders’ inefficient allocation of corporate cash reserves significantly.     

Optimal delegated portfolio management with background risk

Most investors delegate the management of a fraction of their wealth to portfolio managers who are given the task of beating a benchmark. However, in an influential paper [Roll, R., 1992. A mean/variance analysis of tracking error. Journal of Portfolio Management 18, 13–22] shows that the objective functions commonly used by these managers lead to the selection of portfolios that are suboptimal from the perspective of investors. In this paper, we provide an explanation for the use of these objective functions based on the effect of background risk on investors’ optimal portfolios. Our main contribution is to provide conditions under which investors can optimally delegate the management of their wealth to portfolio managers.     

Is local bias a cross-border phenomenon? Evidence from individual investors’ international asset allocation

Extant literature consistently documents that investors tilt their domestic equity portfolios towards regionally close stocks (local bias). We hypothesize that individual investors’ local bias is not limited to the domestic sphere but instead also determines their international investment decisions. Our results confirm the presence of a cross-border local bias. Specifically, we show (i) that the stockholdings of individual investors living within regional proximity to a foreign country display a significantly lower foreign investment bias towards investment opportunities in that country and (ii) that this drop in foreign investment bias levels is disproportionately driven by investments in regionally close neighbor-country companies. The impact of cross-border local bias on investors’ bilateral foreign equity investments is economically significant and holds even after controlling for previously identified explanations of international asset allocation.     

Robust portfolio choice with uncertainty about jump and diffusion risk

We analyze the portfolio planning problem of an ambiguity averse investor. The stock follows a jump-diffusion process. We find that there are pronounced differences between ambiguity aversion with respect to diffusion risk and jump risk. Ignoring ambiguity with respect to jump risk causes larger losses in an incomplete market, whereas ignoring ambiguity with respect to diffusion risk is more severe in a complete market. For a deterministic jump size we show that the loss from market incompleteness is always increasing in the level of ambiguity aversion with respect to one risk factor and decreasing in the level of ambiguity aversion with respect to the other risk factor.     

Can utility optimization explain the demand for structured investment products?

In this paper, we first show that for classical rational investors with correct beliefs and constant absolute or constant relative risk aversion, the utility gains from structured products over and above a portfolio consisting of the risk-free asset and the market portfolio are typically much smaller than their fees. This result holds irrespectively of whether the investors can continuously trade the risk-free asset and the market portfolio at no costs or whether they can just buy the assets and hold them to maturity of the structured product. However, when considering behavioural utility functions, such as prospect theory, or investors with incorrect beliefs (arising from probability weighting or probability misestimation), the utility gain can be sizable.     

Empirical risk aversion functions-estimates and assessment of their reliability

In this paper, we examine investor's risk preferences implied by option prices. In order to derive these preferences, we specify the functional form of a pricing kernel and then shift its parameters until realized returns are best explained by the subjective probability density function, which consists of the ratio of the risk-neutral probability density function and the pricing kernel. We examine, alternatively, pricing kernels of power, exponential, and higher order polynomial forms. Using S&P 500 index options, we find surprising evidence of risk neutrality, instead of risk aversion, in both the power and exponential cases. When extending the underlying assumption on the specification of the pricing kernel to one of higher order polynomial functions, we obtain functions exhibiting ‘monotonically decreasing’ relative risk aversion (DRRA) and anomalous ‘inverted U-shaped’ relative risk aversion. We find, however, that only the DRRA function is robust to variation in sample characteristics, and is statistically significant. Finally, we also find that most of our empirical results are consistent, even when taking into account market imperfections such as illiquidity.     

Why stocks may disappoint

We provide a formal treatment of both static and dynamic portfolio choice using the Disappointment Aversion preferences of Gul (1991. Econometrica 59(3), 667–686), which imply asymmetric aversion to gains versus losses. Our dynamic formulation nests the standard CRRA asset allocation problem as a special case. Using realistic data generating processes, we find reasonable equity portfolio allocations for disappointment averse investors with utility functions exhibiting low curvature. Moderate variation in parameters can robustly generate substantial cross-sectional variation in portfolio holdings, including optimal non-participation in the stock market.     

Does Risk Seeking Drive Stock Prices? A Stochastic Dominance Analysis of Aggregate Investor Preferences and Beliefs

We use various stochastic dominance criteria that account for(local) risk seeking to analyze market portfolio efficiencyrelative to benchmark portfolios formed on market capitalization,book-to-market equity ratio and price momentum. Our resultssuggest that reverse S-shaped utility functions with risk aversionfor losses and risk seeking for gains can explain stock returns.The results are also consistent with a reverse S-shaped patternof subjective probability transformation. The low average yieldon big caps, growth stocks, and past losers may reflect investors’twin desire for downside protection in bear markets and upsidepotential in bull markets.     

Endogenous Life‐Cycle Housing Investment and Portfolio Allocation

This paper develops a life‐cycle portfolio allocation model to address the effects of housing investment on the portfolio allocation of households. The model employs a comprehensive housing investment structure, Epstein–Zin recursive preferences, and a stock market entry cost. Furthermore, rather than resorting to calibration we estimate the value of the relative risk aversion and elasticity of intertemporal substitution. The model shows that housing investment has a strong crowding out effect on investment in risky assets throughout the life‐cycle. We further find that the effect of the presence of housing investment on households portfolio allocation is larger than the effect of having EZ recursive preferences.     

Loss aversion,asymmetric market comovements,and the home bias

Loss aversion has been used to explain why a high equity premium might be consistent with plausible levels of risk aversion. The intuition is that the first-order-different utility impact of wealth gains and losses leads loss-averse investors to behave similarly to investors with high risk aversion. But if so, should those agents not perceive larger gains from international diversification than standard expected-utility investors with plausible levels of risk aversion? They might not, because comovements in international stock markets are asymmetric: correlations are higher in market downturns than in upturns. This asymmetry dampens the gains from diversification relatively more for loss-averse investors. We analyze the portfolio problem of such an investor who has to choose between home and foreign equities in the presence of asymmetric comovement in returns. Perhaps surprisingly, in the context of the home bias puzzle we find that loss-averse investors behave similarly to those with standard expected-utility preferences and plausible levels of risk aversion. We argue that preference specifications that appear to perform well with respect to the equity premium puzzle should be subjected to this “test”.     

Risk-aversion concepts in expected- and non-expected-utility models

The non-expected-utility theories of decision under risk have favored the appearance of new notions of increasing risk like monotone increasing risk (based on the notion of comonotonic random variables) or new notions of risk aversion like aversion to monotone increasing risk, in better agreement with these new theories. After a survey of all the possible notions of increasing risk and of risk aversion and their intrinsic definitions, we show that contrary to expected-utility theory where all the notions of risk aversion have the same characterization (u concave), in the framework of rank-dependent expected utility (one of the most well known of the non-expectedutility models), the characterizations of all these notions of risk aversion are different. Moreover, we show that, even in the expected-utility framework, the new notion of monotone increasing risk can give better answers to some problems of comparative statics such as in portfolio choice or in partial insurance. This new notion also can suggest more intuitive approaches to inequalities measurement.