IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/bay/rdwiwi/732.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Anything is Possible: On the Existence and Uniqueness of Equilibria in the Shleifer-Vishny Model of Limits of Arbitrage

Author

Listed:
  • Arnold, Lutz G.

Abstract

This paper gives a complete characterization of the equilibria in Shleifer and Vishny's (1997) model of "Limits of Arbitrage". We show that expected wealth (the arbitrageurs' objective function) is a possibly non-concave function of investment and that the relation between investment and prices is not necessarily continuous or single-valued or well-defined. As a result, "anything is possible": non-existence or multiplicity of equilibria may arise, and sunspots may govern the equilibrium selection in the latter case. Es wird eine vollständige Charakterisierung möglicher Gleichgewichte im Shleifer-Vishny-Modell zu Grenzen der Arbitrage vorgenommen. Zunächst wird gezeigt, dass die Zielfunktion der Arbitrageure - ihr erwartetes Vermögen - eine nicht-konkave Funktion ihrer Investitionen ist und dass die Abbildung, die die aggregierten Investitionen und die Vermögenspreise in Beziehung zueinander setzt, möglicherweise unstetig, mehrwertig oder gar nicht wohldefiniert ist. Als Konsequenz hieraus "ist alles möglich": Nicht-Existenz eines Gleichgewichts ebenso wie Multiplizität. Im zweiten Fall können Sonnenflecken die Gleichgewichtsauswahl bestimmen.

Suggested Citation

  • Arnold, Lutz G., 2006. "Anything is Possible: On the Existence and Uniqueness of Equilibria in the Shleifer-Vishny Model of Limits of Arbitrage," University of Regensburg Working Papers in Business, Economics and Management Information Systems 418, University of Regensburg, Department of Economics.
    • Handle: RePEc:bay:rdwiwi:732
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://epub.uni-regensburg.de/4534/1/limits_of_arbitrage.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1997. "The Limits of Arbitrage," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 35-55, March.
    2. Barberis, Nicholas & Thaler, Richard, 2003. "A survey of behavioral finance," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 18, pages 1053-1128, Elsevier.
    3. Glaser, Markus & Nöth, Markus & Weber, Martin, 2003. "Behavioral Finance," Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications 03-14, Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim;Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim.
    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. Paulo Vitor Jordão da Gama Silva & Augusto F.C. Neto & Marcelo Cabus Klotzle & Antonio Carlos Figueiredo pinto & Leonardo Lima Gomes, 2019. "Does the cryptocurrency market exhibits feedback trading?," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 39(4), pages 2830-2838.
    2. Wang, Wenzhao & Su, Chen & Duxbury, Darren, 2022. "The conditional impact of investor sentiment in global stock markets: A two-channel examination," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    3. Arnold, Lutz G. & Brunner, Stephan, 2015. "The economics of rational speculation in the presence of positive feedback trading," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 161-174.
    4. Lutz G. Arnold & Stephan Brunner, 2012. "Is Rational Speculation in the Presence of Positive Feedback Traders Destabilizing?," Working Papers 119, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).

    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. Abbigail J. Chiodo & Massimo Guidolin & Michael T. Owyang & Makoto Shimoji, 2003. "Subjective probabilities: psychological evidence and economic applications," Working Papers 2003-009, Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.
    2. Brozynski, Torsten & Menkhoff, Lukas & Schmidt, Ulrich, 2003. "The Use of Momentum, Contrarian and Buy-&-Hold Strategies: Survey Evidence from Fund Managers," Hannover Economic Papers (HEP) dp-290, Leibniz Universität Hannover, Wirtschaftswissenschaftliche Fakultät.
    3. R. Andergassen, 2003. "Rational destabilising speculation and the riding of bubbles," Working Papers 475, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    4. Dash, Saumya Ranjan & Maitra, Debasish, 2018. "Does sentiment matter for stock returns? Evidence from Indian stock market using wavelet approach," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 32-39.
    5. Florian Meier, 2020. "The Age of Cheap Money and Passive Investing: Are Pro Forma Earnings Value Relevant?," Journal of Finance and Investment Analysis, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 9(2), pages 1-1.
    6. Kumari, Jyoti, 2019. "Investor sentiment and stock market liquidity: Evidence from an emerging economy," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 166-180.
    7. Cakici, Nusret & Zaremba, Adam, 2022. "Salience theory and the cross-section of stock returns: International and further evidence," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(2), pages 689-725.
    8. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    9. Stijn Claessens & M. Ayhan Kose, 2013. "Financial Crises: Explanations, Types and Implications," CAMA Working Papers 2013-06, Centre for Applied Macroeconomic Analysis, Crawford School of Public Policy, The Australian National University.
    10. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    11. Wei Xiong, 2013. "Bubbles, Crises, and Heterogeneous Beliefs," NBER Working Papers 18905, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Hommes, C.H. & Wagener, F.O.O., 2008. "Complex evolutionary systems in behavioral finance," CeNDEF Working Papers 08-05, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance.
    13. Sonnemans, Joep & Tuinstra, Jan, 2010. "Positive expectations feedback experiments and number guessing games as models of financial markets," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 964-984, December.
    14. Scheffknecht, Lukas & Geiger, Felix, 2011. "A behavioral macroeconomic model with endogenous boom-bust cycles and leverage dynamcis," FZID Discussion Papers 37-2011, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).
    15. Augusto de la Torre & Alain Ize, 2010. "Containing Systemic Risk: Paradigm-Based Perspectives on Regulatory Reform," Economía Journal, The Latin American and Caribbean Economic Association - LACEA, vol. 0(Fall 2010), pages 25-64, August.
    16. Peng, Lin & Xiong, Wei, 2006. "Investor attention, overconfidence and category learning," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(3), pages 563-602, June.
    17. Saggese, Pietro & Belmonte, Alessandro & Dimitri, Nicola & Facchini, Angelo & Böhme, Rainer, 2023. "Arbitrageurs in the Bitcoin ecosystem: Evidence from user-level trading patterns in the Mt. Gox exchange platform," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 213(C), pages 251-270.
    18. Eric Zitzewitz, 2014. "Retail Securities Regulation in the Aftermath of the Bubble," NBER Chapters, in: Economic Regulation and Its Reform: What Have We Learned?, pages 545-588, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Ritter, Jay R., 2003. "Behavioral finance," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 11(4), pages 429-437, September.
    20. Michael Demmler & Amilcar Orlian Fernández Domínguez, 2021. "Bitcoin and the South Sea Company: A comparative analysis," Revista Finanzas y Politica Economica, Universidad Católica de Colombia, vol. 13(1), pages 197-224, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Anlageverhalten ; Arbitrage; Behavioral Finance ; Grenzen der Arbitrage ; Existenz eines Gleichgewichts ; Sonnenflecken; behavioral finance ; limits of arbitrage ; existence of an equilibrium ; sunspots;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G - Financial Economics

    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:bay:rdwiwi:732. 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: Gernot Deinzer (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/wfregde.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.