IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/huj/dispap/dp531.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Comparing Risks by Acceptance and Rejection

Author

Listed:
  • Sergiu Hart

Abstract

Stochastic dominance is a partial order on risky assets (gambles) that is based on the uniform preference, of all decision-makers (in an appropriate class), for one gamble over another. We modify this, first, by taking into account the status quo (given by the current wealth) and the possibility of rejecting gambles, and second, by comparing rejections that are substantive (that is, uniform over wealth levels or over utilities). This yields two new stochastic orders: wealth-uniform dominance and utility-uniform dominance. Unlike stochastic dominance, these two orders are complete: any two gambles can be compared. Moreover, they are equivalent to the orders induced by, respectively, the Aumann-Serrano (2008) index of riskiness and the Foster-Hart (2009a) measure of riskiness.

Suggested Citation

  • Sergiu Hart, 2010. "Comparing Risks by Acceptance and Rejection," Discussion Paper Series dp531, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    • Handle: RePEc:huj:dispap:dp531
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ma.huji.ac.il/hart/abs/risk-u.html
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Robert J. Aumann & Roberto Serrano, 2008. "An Economic Index of Riskiness," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 810-836, October.
    2. Sergiu Hart, 2009. "A Simple Riskiness Order Leading to the Aumann-Serrano Index of Riskiness," Discussion Paper Series dp517, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem.
    3. Yaari, Menahem E., 1969. "Some remarks on measures of risk aversion and on their uses," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 1(3), pages 315-329, October.
    4. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    5. Haim Levy, 1992. "Stochastic Dominance and Expected Utility: Survey and Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 555-593, April.
    6. Donald Meyer & Jack Meyer, 2005. "Relative Risk Aversion: What Do We Know?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 243-262, December.
    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. Moti Michaeli, 2021. "On Measuring Welfare ‘Behind a Veil of Ignorance’," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 56(1), pages 57-66, January.
    2. Heufer, Jan, 2014. "Nonparametric comparative revealed risk aversion," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 569-616.
    3. Moshe Levy & Haim Levy, 2013. "Prospect Theory: Much Ado About Nothing?," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 7, pages 129-144, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    4. Heller, Yuval & Schreiber, Amnon, 2020. "Short-term investments and indices of risk," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 15(3), July.
    5. Tsang, Chun-Kei & Wong, Wing-Keung & Horowitz, Ira, 2016. "A stochastic-dominance approach to determining the optimal home-size purchase: The case of Hong Kong," MPRA Paper 69175, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    6. Arvanitis, Stelios & Scaillet, Olivier & Topaloglou, Nikolas, 2020. "Spanning tests for Markowitz stochastic dominance," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 217(2), pages 291-311.
    7. Turan G. Bali & Nusret Cakici & Fousseni Chabi-Yo, 2011. "A Generalized Measure of Riskiness," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(8), pages 1406-1423, August.
    8. Thomas Kourouxous & Thomas Bauer, 2019. "Violations of dominance in decision-making," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 12(1), pages 209-239, April.
    9. Doron Nisani, 2023. "On the General Deviation Measure and the Gini coefficient," International Journal of Economic Theory, The International Society for Economic Theory, vol. 19(3), pages 599-610, September.
    10. Grant, S. & Quiggin, J., 2001. "A Model-Free Definition of Increasing Uncertainty," Discussion Paper 2001-84, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
    11. Xu, Guo & Wing-Keung, Wong & Lixing, Zhu, 2013. "Almost Stochastic Dominance for Risk-Averse and Risk-Seeking Investors," MPRA Paper 51744, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. Hautsch, Nikolaus & Scheuch, Christoph & Voigt, Stefan, 2018. "Limits to arbitrage in markets with stochastic settlement latency," CFS Working Paper Series 616, Center for Financial Studies (CFS).
    13. Nowak, Maciej, 2004. "Preference and veto thresholds in multicriteria analysis based on stochastic dominance," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 158(2), pages 339-350, October.
    14. Lean, Hooi Hooi & McAleer, Michael & Wong, Wing-Keung, 2010. "Market efficiency of oil spot and futures: A mean-variance and stochastic dominance approach," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(5), pages 979-986, September.
    15. Takao Asano & Yusuke Osaki, 2017. "Portfolio Allocation Problems between Risky Ambiguous Assets," KIER Working Papers 975, Kyoto University, Institute of Economic Research.
    16. Pinto, Cristian F. & Acuña, Andres A., 2011. "Consistencia de la evaluación de desempeño de inversiones financieras: Pruebas de dominación estocástica versus índices media-varianza [Consistency in the evaluation of financial investment perform," MPRA Paper 31301, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. Schmid Friedrich & Trede Mark, 2000. "Stochastic Dominance in German Asset Returns: Empirical Evidence from the 1990s / Stochastische Dominanz von Renditen deutscher Aktien: Eine empirische Untersuchung für die 90er Jahre," Journal of Economics and Statistics (Jahrbuecher fuer Nationaloekonomie und Statistik), De Gruyter, vol. 220(3), pages 315-326, June.
    18. Al-Khazali, Osamah, 2014. "Revisiting fast profit investor sentiment and stock returns during Ramadan," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 158-170.
    19. Grant, Simon & Quiggin, John, 2005. "Increasing uncertainty: a definition," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 117-141, March.
    20. Peter Brooks & Simon Peters & Horst Zank, 2014. "Risk behavior for gain, loss, and mixed prospects," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 77(2), pages 153-182, August.

    More about this item

    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:huj:dispap:dp531. 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: Michael Simkin (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/crihuil.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.