IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/usg/dp2009/2009-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Goal-Based Investing with Cumulative Prospect Theory and Satisficing Behavior

Author

Listed:
  • Enrico G. De Giorgi

Abstract

This paper presents a time-continuous goal-based portfolio selection model with cumulative prospect theory preferences and satisficing behavior, where investors optimally split their wealth among several investment goals at different horizons. The paper extends the model of Berkelaar, Kouwenberg and Post (2004) to account for multiple-goals. We show that when the discounted values of all target wealths is not too high relative to the initial wealth (i.e., goals are not too ambitious), investors mainly invest to reach short-term investment goals and adopt safe investment strategies for this purpose. However, when goals are very ambitious, they put a high proportion of their wealth in long-term goals and adopt aggressive investment strategies with high leverage to reach short-term goals and the overall investment strategy also displays high leverage. High incentives to reach ambitious shortterm goals (high target returns) and the consequent excessive leverage have been identified as causes for the global financial crisis erupted in 2008.

Suggested Citation

  • Enrico G. De Giorgi, 2009. "Goal-Based Investing with Cumulative Prospect Theory and Satisficing Behavior," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2009 2009-22, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    • Handle: RePEc:usg:dp2009:2009-22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://ux-tauri.unisg.ch/RePEc/usg/dp2009/DP-0922-Gi.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
    2. David B. Brown & Melvyn Sim, 2009. "Satisficing Measures for Analysis of Risky Positions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 71-84, January.
    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. 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.
    5. David B. Brown & Enrico G. De Giorgi & Melvyn Sim, 2009. "A Satisficing Alternative to Prospect Theory," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2009 2009-09, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    6. Mao, James C T, 1970. "Survey of Capital Budgeting: Theory and Practice," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 349-360, May.
    7. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2008. "Stocks as Lotteries: The Implications of Probability Weighting for Security Prices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(5), pages 2066-2100, December.
    8. Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 15-25, 01-02.
    9. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(4), pages 1247-1292, August.
    10. Enrico G. De Giorgi & Shane Legg, 2009. "Portfolio Selection with Narrow Framing: Probability Weighting Matters," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2009 2009-12, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    11. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2000. "Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth: The Common Stock Investment Performance of Individual Investors," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(2), pages 773-806, April.
    12. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2001. "Mental Accounting, Loss Aversion, and Individual Stock Returns," NBER Working Papers 8190, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 2000. "Behavioral Portfolio Theory," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 127-151, June.
    14. Nishant Dass & Massimo Massa & Rajdeep Patgiri, 2008. "Mutual Funds and Bubbles: The Surprising Role of Contractual Incentives," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 51-99, January.
    15. Hanqing Jin & Xun Yu Zhou, 2008. "Behavioral Portfolio Selection In Continuous Time," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 18(3), pages 385-426, July.
    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. Omid Momen & Akbar Esfahanipour & Abbas Seifi, 2020. "A robust behavioral portfolio selection: model with investor attitudes and biases," Operational Research, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 427-446, March.

    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    4. David Hirshleife, 2015. "Behavioral Finance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 133-159, December.
    5. Neszveda, G., 2019. "Essays on behavioral finance," Other publications TiSEM 05059039-5236-42a3-be1b-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    6. Li An & Huijun Wang & Jian Wang & Jianfeng Yu, 2020. "Lottery-Related Anomalies: The Role of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 473-501, January.
    7. Jack Clark Francis, 2021. "Reformulating prospect theory to become a von Neumann–Morgenstern theory," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 965-985, April.
    8. Easley, David & Yang, Liyan, 2015. "Loss aversion, survival and asset prices," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 160(C), pages 494-516.
    9. Li An & Huijun Wang & Jian Wang & Jianfeng Yu, 2015. "Lottery-related anomalies: the role of reference-dependent preferences," Globalization Institute Working Papers 259, Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas.
    10. Stracca, Livio, 2004. "Behavioral finance and asset prices: Where do we stand?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 373-405, June.
    11. Alexander L. Brown & Taisuke Imai & Ferdinand M. Vieider & Colin F. Camerer, 2024. "Meta-analysis of Empirical Estimates of Loss Aversion," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 62(2), pages 485-516, June.
    12. Wang, Huijun & Yan, Jinghua & Yu, Jianfeng, 2017. "Reference-dependent preferences and the risk–return trade-off," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 123(2), pages 395-414.
    13. Yehuda Izhakian, 2012. "Does Ambiguity Diversification Pay?," Working Papers 12-11, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    14. Guo, Jing & He, Xue Dong, 2017. "Equilibrium asset pricing with Epstein-Zin and loss-averse investors," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 86-108.
    15. Luc Meunier & Sima Ohadi, 2023. "When are two portfolios better than one? A prospect theory approach," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 94(3), pages 503-538, April.
    16. Wang, Cheng & Han, Jing, 2023. "Prospect theory and mutual fund flows: Evidence from China," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    17. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang, 2006. "The Loss Aversion / Narrow Framing Approach to the Equity Premium Puzzle," NBER Working Papers 12378, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    18. Matteo Del Vigna, 2011. "Market equilibrium with heterogeneous behavioural and classical investors' preferences," Working Papers - Mathematical Economics 2011-09, Universita' degli Studi di Firenze, Dipartimento di Scienze per l'Economia e l'Impresa.
    19. Hollstein, Fabian & Sejdiu, Vulnet, 2023. "Probability distortions, collectivism, and international stock prices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 39(C).
    20. Fang, Yi, 2012. "Aggregate investor preferences and beliefs in stock market: A stochastic dominance analysis," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(4), pages 528-547.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    behavioral finance; portfolio selection; mental accounting; narrow framing; cumulative prospect theory; satisficing; loss aversion; goal-based approach;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D10 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - General
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    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:usg:dp2009:2009-22. 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: Martina Flockerzi (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vwasgch.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.