Abstract
Using the Heterogeneous Agent Model framework, we incorporate an extension based on Prospect Theory into a popular agent-based asset pricing model. This extension covers the phenomenon of loss aversion manifested in risk aversion and asymmetric treatment of gains and losses. Using Monte Carlo methods, we investigate behavior and statistical properties of the extended model and assess how our extension is manifested in different strategies. We show that, on the one hand, the Prospect Theory extension keeps the essential underlying mechanics of the model intact, but on the other hand it considerably changes the model dynamics. Stability of the model is increased and fundamentalists may be able to survive in the market more easily. When only the fundamentalists are loss-averse, other strategies profit more.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
According to Ehrentreich (2007, p. 56), at the time when the foundations of the EMH were laid, logarithmic asset returns were assumed to be distributed normally and the prices therefore followed the log-normal distribution.
The ‘irrationality’ is meant within the expected utility theory.
PT is descriptive in the sense that it tries to capture the real-world decision-making whereas the expected utility theory is de facto normative—it models how people are supposed to decide.
Regular prospect is a prospect such that either \(p + q < 1\), \(x \geqslant 0 \geqslant y\), or \(x \leqslant 0 \leqslant y\). Evaluation of prospects which are not regular follows a different rule—details are provided in Kahneman and Tversky (1979, p. 276).
The equity premium puzzle is a phenomenon that the average return on equity is far greater than return on a risk-free asset. Such a characteristic has been observed in many markets. The term was first coined by Mehra and Prescott (1985).
We run another ‘benchmark’ simulation of the model without the proposed extensions, that is, for the K–W test, we use a different benchmark than that examined in Sect. 5.3.1.
References
Anufriev M, Hommes C (2012) Evolutionary selection of individual expectations and aggregate outcomes in asset pricing experiments. Am Econ J Microecon 4(4):35–64
Barberis N, Huang M, Santos T (2001) Prospect theory and asset prices. Q J Econ 116(1):1–53
Barunik J, Vacha L, Vosvrda M (2009) Smart predictors in the heterogeneous agent model. J Econ Interact Coord 4(2):163–172
Belsky G, Gilovich T (2010) Why smart people make big money mistakes and how to correct them: lessons from the life-changing science of behavioral economics. Simon and Schuster, New York City
Benartzi S, Thaler RH (1993) Myopic loss aversion and the equity premium puzzle. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research
Branch WA (2004) The theory of rationally heterogeneous expectations: evidence from survey data on inflation expectations. Econ J 114(497):592–621
Brock WA, Hommes CH (1997) A rational route to randomness. Econom J Econom Soc 65(5):1059–1095
Brock WA, Hommes CH (1998) Heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos in a simple asset pricing model. J Econ Dyn Control 22:1235–1274
Cao S-N, Deng J, Li H (2010) Prospect theory and risk appetite: an application to traders’ strategies in the financial market. J Econ Interact Coord 5(2):249–259
Castro PAL, Parsons S (2014) Modeling agent’s preferences based on prospect theory. In: Papers from the AAAI-14 workshop, multidisciplinary workshop on advances in preference handling
Chang C-L, McAleer M, Oxley L (2011) Great expectatrics: great papers, great journals, great econometrics. Econom Rev 30(6):583–619
Chen S-H, Chang C-L, Du Y-R (2012) Agent-based economic models and econometrics. Knowl Eng Rev 27:187–219
Chiarella C, Iori G, Perelló J (2009) The impact of heterogeneous trading rules on the limit order book and order flows. J Econ Dyn Control 33(3):525–537
Cont R (2001) Empirical properties of asset returns: stylized facts and statistical issues. Quant Finance 1(2):223–236
Cont R (2007) Volatility clustering in financial markets: empirical facts and agent-based models. In: Teyssiere G, Kirman A (eds) Long memory in economics. Springer, Berlin, pp 289–309
Ehrentreich N (2007) Agent-based modeling: The Santa Fe Institute artificial stock market model revisited, vol 602. Springer, Berlin
Evans G W, Honkapohja S (2001) Learning and expectations in macroeconomics. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Fama EF (1970) Efficient capital markets: a review of theory and empirical work. J Finance 25(2):383–417
Frankel JA, Froot KA (1990) Chartists, fundamentalists, and trading in the foreign exchange market. Am Econ Rev 80(2):181–185
Giorgi EGD, Legg S (2012) Dynamic portfolio choice and asset pricing with narrow framing and probability weighting. J Econ Dyn Control 36(7):951–972
Giorgi ED, Hens T, Rieger MO (2010) Financial market equilibria with cumulative prospect theory. J Math Econ 46(5):633–651
Grüne L, Semmler W (2008) Asset pricing with loss aversion. J Econ Dyn Control 32(10):3253–3274
Haas M, Pigorsch C (2009) Financial economics, fat-tailed distributions. In: Meyers RA (ed) Encyclopedia of complexity and systems science. Springer, Berlin, pp 3404–3435
Hansen LP, Heckman JJ (1996) The empirical foundations of calibration. J Econ Perspect 10(1):87–104
Harrison GW, Rutström EE (2009) Expected utility theory and prospect theory: one wedding and a decent funeral. Exp Econ 12(2):133–158
Hommes CH (2006) Handbook of computational economics, agent-based computational economics. In: Tesfatsion L, Judd KL (eds) Heterogeneous agent models in economics and finance. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp 1109–1186
Hommes C (2011) The heterogeneous expectations hypothesis: some evidence from the lab. J Econ Dyn Control 35(1):1–24
Hommes C (2013) Behavioral rationality and heterogeneous expectations in complex economic systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–291
Kukacka J, Barunik J (2013) Behavioural breaks in the heterogeneous agent model: the impact of herding, overconfidence, and market sentiment. Physica A 392(23):5920–5938
Kukacka J, Barunik J (2017) Estimation of financial agent-based models with simulated maximum likelihood. J Econ Dyn Control 85:21–45
Li Y, Yang L (2013) Prospect theory, the disposition effect, and asset prices. J Financ Econ 107(3):715–739
Mankiw NG, Reis R, Wolfers J (2004) Disagreement about inflation expectations. In: NBER macroeconomics annual 2003, vol 18. The MIT Press, Cambridge, pp 209–270
Mehra R, Prescott EC (1985) The equity premium: a puzzle. J Monet Econ 15(2):145–161
Shefrin H, Statman M (1985) The disposition to sell winners too early and ride losers too long: theory and evidence. J Finance 40(3):777–790
Shimokawa T, Suzuki K, Misawa T (2007) An agent-based approach to financial stylized facts. Physica A 379(1):207–225
Tedeschi G, Iori G, Gallegati M (2012) Herding effects in order driven markets: the rise and fall of gurus. J Econ Behav Organ 81(1):82–96
Tu Q (2005) Empirical analysis of time preferences and risk aversion. Technical report, School of Economics and Management
Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertainty 5(4):297–323
Vacha L, Barunik J, Vosvrda M (2012) How do skilled traders change the structure of the market. Int Rev Financ Anal 23:66–71
van Kersbergen K, Vis B (2014) Comparative welfare state politics: development, opportunities, and reform. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Vissing-Jorgensen A (2004) Perspectives on behavioral finance: does “irrationality” disappear with wealth? Evidence from expectations and actions. In: NBER macroeconomics annual 2003, vol 18, NBER Chapters. National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, pp 139–208
West KD (1988) Bubbles, fads, and stock price volatility tests: a partial evaluation. Working paper 2574, National Bureau of Economic Research
Yao J, Li D (2013) Prospect theory and trading patterns. J Bank Finance 37(8):2793–2805
Zhang W, Semmler W (2009) Prospect theory for stock markets: empirical evidence with time-series data. J Econ Behav Organ 72(3):835–849
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding authors
Additional information
The views expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the position of Moody’s Analytics, Moody’s Investors Service, or Moody’s Corporation. J. Kukacka gratefully acknowledges financial support from the Czech Science Foundation under the P402/12/G097 DYME—‘Dynamic Models in Economics’ project.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Polach, J., Kukacka, J. Prospect Theory in the Heterogeneous Agent Model. J Econ Interact Coord 14, 147–174 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-018-0219-6
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11403-018-0219-6