IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/bla/mathfi/v34y2024i3p925-976.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Reference dependence and endogenous anchors

Author

Listed:
  • Paolo Guasoni
  • Andrea Meireles‐Rodrigues

Abstract

In a complete market, we find optimal portfolios for an investor whose satisfaction stems from both a payoff's intrinsic utility and its comparison with an endogenous reference as modeled by Kőszegi and Rabin. In the regular regime, arising when reference dependence is low, the marginal utility of the optimal payoff is proportional to a twist of the pricing kernel. High reference dependence leads to the anchors regime, whereby investors reduce disappointment by concentrating significant probability in one or few fixed outcomes, or “anchors.” Multiple equilibria arise because anchors may not be unique. If stocks follow geometric Brownian motion, the model implies that investors with longer horizons choose larger stocks holdings.

Suggested Citation

  • Paolo Guasoni & Andrea Meireles‐Rodrigues, 2024. "Reference dependence and endogenous anchors," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(3), pages 925-976, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:bla:mathfi:v:34:y:2024:i:3:p:925-976
    DOI: 10.1111/mafi.12421
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/mafi.12421
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/mafi.12421?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Paul Embrechts & Marius Hofert, 2013. "A note on generalized inverses," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 77(3), pages 423-432, June.
    2. Dybvig, Philip H, 1988. "Distributional Analysis of Portfolio Choice," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 61(3), pages 369-393, July.
    3. Paolo Guasoni & Andrea Meireles-Rodrigues, 2020. "Reference Dependence and Market Participation," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 129-156, February.
    4. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. Arjan B. Berkelaar & Roy Kouwenberg & Thierry Post, 2004. "Optimal Portfolio Choice under Loss Aversion," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 86(4), pages 973-987, November.
    8. Philip H. Dybvig, 1988. "Inefficient Dynamic Portfolio Strategies or How to Throw Away a Million Dollars in the Stock Market," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 1(1), pages 67-88.
    9. Hanqing Jin & Xun Yu Zhou, 2008. "Behavioral Portfolio Selection In Continuous Time," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 385-426, July.
    10. 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..
    11. Xiaoquan Liu & Mark Shackleton & Stephen Taylor & Xinzhong Xu, 2009. "Empirical pricing kernels obtained from the UK index options market," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(10), pages 989-993.
    12. Sugden, Robert, 2003. "Reference-dependent subjective expected utility," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 111(2), pages 172-191, August.
    13. Antonio E. Bernardo & Olivier Ledoit, 2000. "Gain, Loss, and Asset Pricing," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 108(1), pages 144-172, February.
    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. Curatola, Giuliano, 2017. "Optimal portfolio choice with loss aversion over consumption," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 345-358.
    2. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    3. 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.
    4. Servaas van Bilsen & Roger J. A. Laeven & Theo E. Nijman, 2020. "Consumption and Portfolio Choice Under Loss Aversion and Endogenous Updating of the Reference Level," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(9), pages 3927-3955, September.
    5. Simon Gächter & Eric J. Johnson & Andreas Herrmann, 2022. "Individual-level loss aversion in riskless and risky choices," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 92(3), pages 599-624, April.
    6. L. Rüschendorf & Steven Vanduffel, 2020. "On the construction of optimal payoffs," Decisions in Economics and Finance, Springer;Associazione per la Matematica, vol. 43(1), pages 129-153, June.
    7. Aurélien Baillon & Han Bleichrodt & Vitalie Spinu, 2020. "Searching for the Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 93-112, January.
    8. Wang, Jianli & Liu, Liqun & Neilson, William S., 2020. "The participation puzzle with reference-dependent expected utility preferences," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 278-287.
    9. Rosenblatt-Wisch, Rina, 2008. "Loss aversion in aggregate macroeconomic time series," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 52(7), pages 1140-1159, October.
    10. Ulrich Schmidt & Chris Starmer & Robert Sugden, 2008. "Third-generation prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 36(3), pages 203-223, June.
    11. Curatola, Giuliano, 2016. "Optimal consumption and portfolio choice with loss aversion," SAFE Working Paper Series 130, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    12. Kogler, Christoph & Kühberger, Anton & Gilhofer, Rainer, 2013. "Real and hypothetical endowment effects when exchanging lottery tickets: Is regret a better explanation than loss aversion?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 37(C), pages 42-53.
    13. van Dolder, Dennie & Vandenbroucke, Jurgen, 2024. "Behavioral risk profiling: Measuring loss aversion of individual investors," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    14. Foellmi, Reto & Jaeggi, Adrian & Rosenblatt-Wisch, Rina, 2019. "Loss aversion at the aggregate level across countries and its relation to economic fundamentals," Journal of Macroeconomics, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1-1.
    15. Horst Zank, 2010. "On probabilities and loss aversion," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 68(3), pages 243-261, March.
    16. Song, Jingjing & Bi, Xiuchun & Li, Rong & Zhang, Shuguang, 2017. "Optimal consumption and portfolio selection problems under loss aversion with downside consumption constraints," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 299(C), pages 80-94.
    17. Paolo Guasoni & Andrea Meireles-Rodrigues, 2020. "Reference Dependence and Market Participation," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 45(1), pages 129-156, February.
    18. Gächter, Simon & Johnson, Eric J. & Herrmann, Andreas, 2007. "Individual-Level Loss Aversion in Riskless and Risky Choices," IZA Discussion Papers 2961, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    19. Lou, Youcheng & Strub, Moris S. & Li, Duan & Wang, Shouyang, 2021. "The impact of a reference point determined by social comparison on wealth growth and inequality," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 127(C).
    20. Graham Loomes & Shepley Orr & Robert Sugden, 2009. "Taste uncertainty and status quo effects in consumer choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 39(2), pages 113-135, October.

    More about this item

    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:bla:mathfi:v:34:y:2024:i:3:p:925-976. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.blackwellpublishing.com/journal.asp?ref=0960-1627 .

    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.