IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jomega/v123y2024ics0305048323001561.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparative risk aversion vs. threshold choice in the Omega ratio

Author

Listed:
  • Balter, Anne G.
  • Chau, Ki Wai
  • Schweizer, Nikolaus

Abstract

We study conditions under which the threshold parameter in the Omega ratio represents risk aversion in the sense of monotonicity of risk premia. To this end, we derive asymptotic expansions for risk premia associated with taking a small additional risk on top of a background risk. These risk premia have the expected monotonicity behavior if, roughly speaking, the variance of the additional risk decreases with the background risk and if the density of the background risk is log-concave. When these conditions are violated, the threshold in the Omega ratio does not represent risk aversion in general. Finally, we compare our sufficient conditions for the Omega ratio to those that are needed to guarantee monotonicity of risk premia with an expected utility criterion under background risk. We argue that the conditions that are needed for the Omega threshold to represent risk aversion are comparable to those that are needed for expected utility with exponential utility functions.

Suggested Citation

  • Balter, Anne G. & Chau, Ki Wai & Schweizer, Nikolaus, 2024. "Comparative risk aversion vs. threshold choice in the Omega ratio," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jomega:v:123:y:2024:i:c:s0305048323001561
    DOI: 10.1016/j.omega.2023.102992
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305048323001561
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.omega.2023.102992?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Caporin, Massimiliano & Costola, Michele & Jannin, Gregory & Maillet, Bertrand, 2018. "“On the (Ab)use of Omega?”," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 11-33.
    2. Manski, Charles F., 1986. "Ordinal Utility Models Of Decision Making Under Uncertainty," SSRI Workshop Series 292682, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Social Systems Research Institute.
    3. Abel, Andrew B, 1990. "Asset Prices under Habit Formation and Catching Up with the Joneses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(2), pages 38-42, May.
    4. Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Coherence And Elicitability," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 901-918, October.
    5. Gilbert W. Bassett, Jr., 1987. "The St. Petersburg Paradox and Bounded Utility," History of Political Economy, Duke University Press, vol. 19(4), pages 517-523, Winter.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Christopher P. Chambers, 2009. "An Axiomatization Of Quantiles On The Domain Of Distribution Functions," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 19(2), pages 335-342, April.
    9. Lopes, Lola L., 1996. "When Time Is of the Essence: Averaging, Aspiration, and the Short Run," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 179-189, March.
    10. Loomes, Graham & Sugden, Robert, 1982. "Regret Theory: An Alternative Theory of Rational Choice under Uncertainty," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 92(368), pages 805-824, December.
    11. Stefan Zeisberger, 2022. "Do people care about loss probabilities?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(2), pages 185-213, October.
    12. Balder, Sven & Schweizer, Nikolaus, 2017. "Risk aversion vs. the Omega ratio: Consistency results," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 78-84.
    13. Mendelson, Haim, 1987. "Quantile-preserving spread," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 42(2), pages 334-351, August.
    14. Bellini, Fabio & Cesarone, Francesco & Colombo, Christian & Tardella, Fabio, 2021. "Risk parity with expectiles," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(3), pages 1149-1163.
    15. Bernhard Klar & Alfred Müller, 2018. "On Consistency of the Omega Ratio with Stochastic Dominance Rules," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Kathrin Glau & Daniël Linders & Aleksey Min & Matthias Scherer & Lorenz Schneider & Rudi Zagst (ed.), Innovations in Insurance, Risk- and Asset Management, chapter 14, pages 367-380, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    16. Sehgal, Ruchika & Sharma, Amita & Mansini, Renata, 2023. "Worst-case analysis of Omega-VaR ratio optimization model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 114(C).
    17. Fabio Bellini & Bernhard Klar & Alfred Müller, 2018. "Expectiles, Omega Ratios and Stochastic Ordering," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 20(3), pages 855-873, September.
    18. Luciano de Castro & Antonio F. Galvao & Gabriel Montes-Rojas & Jose Olmo, 2022. "Portfolio selection in quantile decision models," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 133-181, June.
    19. 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..
    20. Guastaroba, G. & Mansini, R. & Ogryczak, W. & Speranza, M.G., 2016. "Linear programming models based on Omega ratio for the Enhanced Index Tracking Problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(3), pages 938-956.
    21. Bellini, Fabio & Klar, Bernhard & Müller, Alfred & Rosazza Gianin, Emanuela, 2014. "Generalized quantiles as risk measures," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 41-48.
    22. David E. Bell, 1982. "Regret in Decision Making under Uncertainty," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 30(5), pages 961-981, October.
    23. Ross, Stephen A, 1981. "Some Stronger Measures of Risk Aversion in the Small and the Large with Applications," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(3), pages 621-638, May.
    24. Fabio Bellini & Tolulope Fadina & Ruodu Wang & Yunran Wei, 2020. "Parametric measures of variability induced by risk measures," Papers 2012.05219, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    25. Machina, Mark J & Neilson, William S, 1987. "The Ross Characterization of Risk Aversion: Strengthening and Extension," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(5), pages 1139-1149, September.
    26. Kihlstrom, Richard E & Romer, David & Williams, Steve, 1981. "Risk Aversion with Random Initial Wealth," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 49(4), pages 911-920, June.
    27. Jones, M. C., 1994. "Expectiles and M-quantiles are quantiles," Statistics & Probability Letters, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 149-153, May.
    28. Schuhmacher, Frank & Eling, Martin, 2012. "A decision-theoretic foundation for reward-to-risk performance measures," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(7), pages 2077-2082.
    29. Marzena Rostek, 2010. "Quantile Maximization in Decision Theory ," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(1), pages 339-371.
    30. Newey, Whitney K & Powell, James L, 1987. "Asymmetric Least Squares Estimation and Testing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 819-847, July.
    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. Castro, Luciano de & Galvao, Antonio F. & Kim, Jeong Yeol & Montes-Rojas, Gabriel & Olmo, Jose, 2022. "Experiments on portfolio selection: A comparison between quantile preferences and expected utility decision models," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 97(C).
    2. de Castro, Luciano & Galvao, Antonio F. & Noussair, Charles N. & Qiao, Liang, 2022. "Do people maximize quantiles?," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 132(C), pages 22-40.
    3. Luciano de Castro & Antonio F. Galvao & Gabriel Montes-Rojas & Jose Olmo, 2022. "Portfolio selection in quantile decision models," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 18(2), pages 133-181, June.
    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. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Thierry Post, 2011. "Loss Aversion with a State-Dependent Reference Point," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(6), pages 1094-1110, June.
    6. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2013. "Salience and Consumer Choice," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 121(5), pages 803-843.
    7. Ulrich Schmidt & Horst Zank, 2012. "A genuine foundation for prospect theory," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 45(2), pages 97-113, October.
    8. Ivan Barreda-Tarrazona & Ainhoa Jaramillo-Gutierrez & Daniel Navarro-Martinez & Gerardo Sabater-Grande, 2014. "The role of forgone opportunities in decision making under risk," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 167-188, October.
    9. Jacobs Martin, 2016. "Accounting for Changing Tastes: Approaches to Explaining Unstable Individual Preferences," Review of Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 67(2), pages 121-183, August.
    10. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2016. "Expected utility theory and inner and outer measures of loss aversion," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 10-20.
    11. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2012. "Salience Theory of Choice Under Risk," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 127(3), pages 1243-1285.
    12. Zhihua Li & Songfa Zhong, 2023. "Reference Dependence in Intertemporal Preference," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(1), pages 475-490, January.
    13. Paolo Guasoni & Gur Huberman & Dan Ren, 2020. "Shortfall aversion," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(3), pages 869-920, July.
    14. Xue Dong He & Zhaoli Jiang & Steven Kou, 2020. "Portfolio Selection under Median and Quantile Maximization," Papers 2008.10257, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2021.
    15. Georgalos, Konstantinos & Paya, Ivan & Peel, David, 2024. "The Kőszegi–Rabin expectations-based model and risk-apportionment tasks for elicitation of higher order risk preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 749-770.
    16. 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.
    17. Charles-Cadogan, G., 2018. "Losses loom larger than gains and reference dependent preferences in Bernoulli’s utility function," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 220-237.
    18. van Bilsen, Servaas & Laeven, Roger J.A., 2020. "Dynamic consumption and portfolio choice under prospect theory," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 224-237.
    19. Mark Schneider & Robert Day, 2018. "Target-Adjusted Utility Functions and Expected-Utility Paradoxes," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(1), pages 271-287, January.
    20. Korn, Olaf & Rieger, Marc Oliver, 2019. "Hedging with regret," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 192-205.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Omega ratio; Risk preferences; Decision criteria; Background risk;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    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:eee:jomega:v:123:y:2024:i:c:s0305048323001561. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/375/description#description .

    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.