IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/annfin/v9y2013i2p271-289.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Utilities bounded below

Author

Listed:
  • Roman Muraviev
  • L. Rogers

Abstract

It is common to work with utilities which are not bounded below, but it seems hard to reconcile this with common sense; is the plight of a man who receives only one crumb of bread a day to eat really very much worse than the plight of a man who receives two? In this paper we study utilities which are bounded below, which necessitates novel modelling elements to prevent the question becoming trivial. What we propose is that an agent is subjected to random reviews of his finances. If he is reviewed and found to be bankrupt, then he is thrown into jail, and receives some large but finite negative value. In such a framework, we find optimal investment and consumption behaviour very different from the standard story. As the agent’s wealth goes negative, he gradually abandons hope of ever becoming honest again, and plunders as much as he can before being caught. Agents with very high wealth act like standard Merton investors. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Roman Muraviev & L. Rogers, 2013. "Utilities bounded below," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 271-289, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:annfin:v:9:y:2013:i:2:p:271-289
    DOI: 10.1007/s10436-012-0212-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10436-012-0212-3
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10436-012-0212-3?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. Francisco J. Gomes, 2005. "Portfolio Choice and Trading Volume with Loss-Averse Investors," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 78(2), pages 675-706, March.
    2. Ioannis Karatzas & John P. Lehoczky & Suresh P. Sethi & Steven E. Shreve, 1986. "Explicit Solution of a General Consumption/Investment Problem," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 261-294, May.
    3. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(1), pages 73-92.
    4. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 2000. "Behavioral Portfolio Theory," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 127-151, June.
    5. 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..
    6. Laurence Carassus & Miklos Rasonyi, 2011. "On optimal investment for a behavioural investor in multiperiod incomplete market models," Papers 1107.1617, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2012.
    7. Haim Levy, 2004. "Prospect Theory and Mean-Variance Analysis," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(4), pages 1015-1041.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Miklos Rasonyi, 2014. "Optimal investment with bounded above utilities in discrete time markets," Papers 1409.2023, arXiv.org.
    2. Mikl'os R'asonyi & Andrea Meireles Rodrigues, 2013. "Continuous-Time Portfolio Optimisation for a Behavioural Investor with Bounded Utility on Gains," Papers 1309.0362, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2014.

    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. Hanqing Jin & Xun Yu Zhou, 2008. "Behavioral Portfolio Selection In Continuous Time," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 385-426, July.
    2. Leon Li & Nen-Chen Richard Hwang, 2017. "Prospect Theory and Earnings Manipulation: Examination of the Non-Uniform Relationship between Earnings Manipulation and Stock Returns Using Quantile Regression," Working Papers in Economics 17/25, University of Waikato.
    3. Yan Li & Liyan Yang, 2013. "Asset-Pricing Implications of Dividend Volatility," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(9), pages 2036-2055, September.
    4. Fulga, Cristinca, 2016. "Portfolio optimization under loss aversion," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 251(1), pages 310-322.
    5. Pasquariello, Paolo, 2014. "Prospect Theory and market quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 276-310.
    6. Marie-Hélène Broihanne & Maxime Merli & Patrick Roger, 2006. "Théorie comportementale du portefeuille. Intérêt et limites," Revue économique, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 57(2), pages 297-314.
    7. Xue Dong He & Xun Yu Zhou, 2011. "Portfolio Choice Under Cumulative Prospect Theory: An Analytical Treatment," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(2), pages 315-331, February.
    8. Bi, Junna & Jin, Hanqing & Meng, Qingbin, 2018. "Behavioral mean-variance portfolio selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 271(2), pages 644-663.
    9. Topaloglou, Nikolas & Tsionas, Mike G., 2020. "Stochastic dominance tests," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 112(C).
    10. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    11. Ellie Papavasiliou & Nikolas Topaloglou & Georgios Tsomidis, 2022. "Investors’ Behavior in Alternative Asset Classes," SPOUDAI Journal of Economics and Business, SPOUDAI Journal of Economics and Business, University of Piraeus, vol. 72(3-4), pages 3-55, July-Dece.
    12. Chen, Zheng & Li, Zhongfei & Zeng, Yan & Sun, Jingyun, 2017. "Asset allocation under loss aversion and minimum performance constraint in a DC pension plan with inflation risk," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 137-150.
    13. Vicky Henderson, 2012. "Prospect Theory, Liquidation, and the Disposition Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 445-460, February.
    14. Alain Bensoussan & Abel Cadenillas & Hyeng Keun Koo, 2015. "Entrepreneurial Decisions on Effort and Project with a Nonconcave Objective Function," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 902-914, October.
    15. Pfiffelmann, Marie & Roger, Tristan & Bourachnikova, Olga, 2016. "When Behavioral Portfolio Theory meets Markowitz theory," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 419-435.
    16. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    17. Arvid Hoffmann & Sam Henry & Nikos Kalogeras, 2013. "Aspirations as reference points: an experimental investigation of risk behavior over time," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 75(2), pages 193-210, August.
    18. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    19. Magi, Alessandro, 2009. "Portfolio choice, behavioral preferences and equity home bias," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 49(2), pages 501-520, May.
    20. Blake, David & Wright, Douglas & Zhang, Yumeng, 2013. "Target-driven investing: Optimal investment strategies in defined contribution pension plans under loss aversion," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 195-209.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Expected utility; Non-concave utility; Von Neumann-Morgenstern preferences; D01; D03;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles

    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:kap:annfin:v:9:y:2013:i:2:p:271-289. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.