Author
Listed:
- Patrick L. Brockett
(Departments of Finance, Mathematics, Management Science and Information Systems, and Applied Research Laboratories, University of Texas, Austin, Texas 78712-1179)
- Yehuda Kahane
(Erhard Insurance Center, Faculty of Management, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel)
Abstract
This paper considers choice between individual projects and shows that when the choice set includes arbitrary distributions, then any assumed relationship between expected utility theory and general moment preferences for individual decision makers is theoretically unsound. In particular, a risk averse investor with any common utility function may, when choosing between two positive return opportunities, prefer the project simultaneously having a lower mean, higher variance, and lower positive skewness. Moreover, the decision maker can prefer opportunities with higher variance even when the opportunities are continuous, unimodal, and arbitrarily visually and statistically close to the normal distribution in shape. Our conclusions hold for any decision maker with a utility function whose derivatives alternate in sign being strictly positive or negative (i.e., we exclude the uninteresting cases of quadratic and cubic utilities). The method of analysis is based upon the theory of Tchebychev systems of functions which deals with the expected value of [utility] functions of stochastic variables with known moments. Although we focus on the first three moments, the results, as presented here, apply to all higher moments as well. It is also shown that there can be extremely large deviations between the certainty equivalents of distributions having the same moments, so this result is also pertinent to practical decision analysts as well. The paper demonstrates that the properties of utility functions have implications which are much more subtle than previously recognized for evaluating distributions in terms of their moments.
Suggested Citation
Patrick L. Brockett & Yehuda Kahane, 1992.
"Risk, Return, Skewness and Preference,"
Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(6), pages 851-866, June.
Handle:
RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:38:y:1992:i:6:p:851-866
DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.38.6.851
Download full text from publisher
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:inm:ormnsc:v:38:y:1992:i:6:p:851-866. 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.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.