4.5 Article

Time consistent behavioral portfolio policy for dynamic mean-variance formulation

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE OPERATIONAL RESEARCH SOCIETY
Volume 68, Issue 12, Pages 1647-1660

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1057/s41274-017-0179-6

Keywords

investment analysis; state-dependent risk aversion; dynamic mean-variance formulation; time consistency; behavioral portfolio policy

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [71601107, 71671106, 71201094]
  2. State Key Program in the Major Research Plan of National Natural Science Foundation of China [91546202]
  3. Research Grants Council of Hong Kong [414513, 14204514, 15209614, 15224215, 15255416]
  4. Shanghai Pujiang Program [15PJC051]
  5. Patrick Huen Wing Ming Chair Professorship of Systems Engineering and Engineering Management

Ask authors/readers for more resources

When one considers an optimal portfolio policy under a mean-risk formulation, it is essential to correctly model investors' risk aversion which may be time variant or even state dependent. In this paper, we propose a behavioral risk aversion model, in which risk aversion is a piecewise linear function of the current excess wealth level with a reference point at the discounted investment target (either surplus or shortage), to reflect a behavioral pattern with both house money and break-even effects. Due to the time inconsistency of the resulting multi-period mean-variance model with adaptive risk aversion, we investigate the time consistent behavioral portfolio policy by solving a nested mean-variance game formulation. We derive a semi-analytical time consistent behavioral portfolio policy which takes a piecewise linear feedback form of the current excess wealth level with respect to the discounted investment target. Finally, we extend the above results to time consistent behavioral portfolio selection for dynamic mean-variance formulation with a cone constraint.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available