Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Prospect and Markowitz stochastic dominance

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Annals of Finance Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Levy and Wiener (J Risk Uncertain 16(2), 147–163, 1998), Levy and Levy (Manage Sci 48(10), 1334–1349, 2002; Rev Fin Stud 17(4), 1015–1041, 2004) develop the prospect and Markowitz stochastic dominance theory with S-shaped and reverse S-shaped utility functions for investors. In this paper, we extend their work on prospect stochastic dominance theory (PSD) and Markowitz stochastic dominance theory (MSD) to the first three orders and link the corresponding S-shaped and reverse S-shaped utility functions to the first three orders. We also provide experiments to illustrate each case of the MSD and PSD to the first three orders and demonstrate that the higher order MSD and PSD cannot be replaced by the lower order MSD and PSD. Furthermore, we formulate the following PSD and MSD properties: hierarchy exists in both PSD and MSD relationships; arbitrage opportunities exist in the first orders of both PSD and MSD; and for any two prospects under certain conditions, their third order MSD preference will be ‘the opposite of’ or ‘the same as’ their counterpart third order PSD preference. By extending the work of Levy and Wiener and Levy and Levy, we provide investors with more tools to identify the first and third order PSD and MSD prospects and thus they could make wiser choices on their investment decision.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson G.J. (2004) Toward an empirical analysis of polarization. J Econ 122: 1–26

    Google Scholar 

  • Anscombe F.J., Aumann R.J. (1963) A definition of subjective probability. Ann Math Stat 34(1): 199–205

    Google Scholar 

  • Arrow K.J. (1971) Essays in the theory of risk-bearing. Chicago, Markham

    Google Scholar 

  • Barberis N., Huang M., Santos T. (2001) Prospect theory and asset prices. Q J Econ 116: 1–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bawa V.S. (1978) Safety-first, stochastic dominance, and optimal portfolio choice. J Fin Quant Anal 13: 255–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Benartzi S., Thaler R. (1995) Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle. Q J Econ 110(1): 73–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broll U., Wahl J.E., Wong W.K. (2006) Elasticity of risk aversion and international trade. Econ Lett 91(1): 126–130

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Falk H., Levy H. (1989) Market reaction to quarterly earnings’ announcements: a stochastic dominance based test of market efficiency. Manage Sci 35(4): 425–446

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn P.C. (1964) Decision and Value Theory. New York, Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Fishburn P.C., Kochenberger G.A. (1979) Two-piece Von Neumann–Morgenstern utility functions. Decis Sci 10: 503–518

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fong W.M., Wong W.K., Lean H.H. (2005) International momentum strategies: a stochastic dominance approach. J Fin Markets 8: 89–109

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Friedman M., Savage L.J. (1948) The utility analysis of choices involving risk. J Polit Econ 56: 279–304

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hammond J.S. (1974) Simplifying the choice between uncertain prospects where preference is nonlinear. Manage Sci 20(7): 1047–1072

    Google Scholar 

  • Huang C.-f., Litzenberger R.H. (1988) Foundations for Financial Economics. New York, North-Holland

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarrow R. (1986) The relationship between arbitrage and first order stochastic dominance. J Fin 41: 915–921

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kahneman D., Tversky A. (1979) Prospect theory of decisions under risk. Econometrica 47(2): 263–291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kobberling V., Wakker P.P. (2005) An index of loss aversion. J Econ Theory 122: 119–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuosmanen T. (2004) Efficient diversification according to stochastic dominance criteria. Manage Sci 50(10): 1390–1406

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy H., Levy M. (2004) Prospect theory and mean-variance analysis. Rev Fin Stud 17(4): 1015–1041

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy M., Levy H. (2002) Prospect theory: much ado about nothing? Manage Sci 48(10): 1334–1349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levy H., Wiener Z. (1998) Stochastic dominance and prospect dominance with subjective weighting functions. J Risk Uncertain 16(2): 147–163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li C.K., Wong W.K. (1999) A note on stochastic dominance for risk averters and risk takers. RAIRO Recherche Operationnelle 33: 509–524

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LuceR.D. (2000) Utility of gains and losses: measurement theoretical and experimental approaches. London, Lawrence Erlbaum Publishers

    Google Scholar 

  • Machina M.J. (1982) Expected utility’ analysis without the independence axiom. Econometrica 50(2): 277–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Machina M.J., Schmeidler D. (1992) A more robust definition of subjective probability. Econometrica 60(4): 745–780

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz H.M. (1952) The utility of wealth. J Polit Econ 60: 151–156

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Matsumura E.M., Tsui K.W., Wong W.K. (1990) An extended multinomial-Dirichlet model for error bounds for dollar-unit sampling. Contemp Account Res 6(2-I): 485–500

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNamara J.R. (1998) Portfolio selection using stochastic dominance criteria. Decis Sci 29(4): 785–801

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyer J. (1977) Second degree stochastic dominance with respect to a function. Int Econ Rev 18: 476–487

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myagkov M., Plott C.R. (1997) Exchange economies and loss exposure: experiments exploring prospect theory and competitive equilibria in market environments. Am Econ Rev 87: 801–828

    Google Scholar 

  • Ng Y.K. (1965) Why do people buy lottery tickets? Choices involving risk and the indivisibility of expenditure. J Polit Econ 73(5): 530–535

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pennings J.M.E., Smidts A. (2003) The shape of utility functions and organizational behavior. Manage Sci 49(9): 1251–1263

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post T. (2003) Stochastic dominance in case of portfolio diversification: Lin Program Tests. J Fin 58(5): 1905–1931

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Post T., Levy H. (2005) Does risk seeking drive asset prices? A stochastic dominance analysis of aggregate investor preferences and beliefs. Rev Fin Stud 18(3): 925–953

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt J.W. (1964) Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica 32: 122–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Quirk J.P., Saposnik R. (1962) Admissibility and measurable utility functions. Rev Econ Stud 29: 140–146

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rabin M. (2000) Risk aversion and expected-utility theory: a calibration theorem. Econometrica 68: 1281–1292

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy A.D. (1952) Safety first and the holding of assets. Econometrica 20(3): 431–449

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shefrin H., Statman M. (1993) Behavioral aspect of the design and marketing of financial products. Fin Manage 22(2): 123–134

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Starmer C. (2000) Developments in non-expected utility theory: the hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. J Econ Lit 38: 332–382

    Google Scholar 

  • Stoyan D. (1983) Comparison methods for queues and other stochastic models. New York, Wiley

    Google Scholar 

  • Swalm R.O. (1966) Utility theory–insights into Risk Taking. Harv Bus Rev 44: 123–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Thaler R.H., Johnson E.J. (1990) Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: the effects of prior outcomes on risky choice. Manage Sci 36: 643–660

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky A., Kahneman D. (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 5: 297–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • von Neuman J., Morgenstern O. (1944) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. Princeton, Princeton University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakker P.P. (2003) The Data of Levy and Levy (2002) Prospect theory: much ado about nothing? Actually support prospect theory. Manage Sci 49(7): 979–981

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Whitmore G.A. (1970) Third-degree stochastic dominance. Am Econ Rev 60: 457–459

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams C.A.Jr. (1966) Attitudes toward speculative risks as an indicator of attitudes toward pure risks. J Risk Insur 33(4): 577–586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang M., Fischbeck P.S. (2004) Incorporating framing into prospect theory modeling: a mixture-model approach. J Risk Uncertain 29(2): 181–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong W.K., Li C.K. (1999) A note on convex stochastic dominance theory. Econ Lett 62: 293–300

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wong W.K., Miller R.B. (1990) Analysis of ARIMA-noise models with repeated time series. J Bus Econ Stat 8(2): 243–250

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu G., Gonzalez R. (1996) Curvature of the probability weighting function. Manage Sci 42: 1676–1690

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wu G., Wu J.Z., Abdellaoui M. (2005) Testing prospect Theory using probability tradeoff consistency. J Risk Uncertain 30: 107–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Risk Management Institute and Department of Economics, National University of Singapore, 1 Arts Link, Singapore, 117570, Singapore

    W. -K. Wong

  2. Associate Dean of Science, Department of Mathematics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, Hong Kong

    R. H. Chan

Authors
  1. W. -K. Wong
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. R. H. Chan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to W. -K. Wong.

Additional information

This paper was done when I were visiting Graduate School of Business, University ofWisconsin-Madison, USA.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wong, W.K., Chan, R.H. Prospect and Markowitz stochastic dominance. Annals of Finance 4, 105–129 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10436-007-0072-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10436-007-0072-4

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation