Stochastic Dominance Tests for Decreasing Absolute Risk Aversion. I. Discrete Random Variables

Stochastic dominance (SD) theory is concerned with orderings of random variables by classes of utility functions characterized solely in terms of general properties. This paper discusses a type of stochastic dominance, called DSD, which is denned by the utility functions having decreasing absolute risk-aversion. Necessary and sufficient conditions for DSD are presented for discrete random variables which, after the possible addition of points of zero probability, are concentrated on finitely many equally-spaced points. The problem is cast as a nonlinear program, which is solved through an efficient dynamic programming routine. Examples are presented to illustrate the increased effectiveness of DSD relative to previous types of stochastic dominance.

[1]  G. Whitmore,et al.  Third-Degree Stochastic Dominance , 1970 .

[2]  Haim Levy,et al.  ALTERNATIVE EFFICIENCY CRITERIA: AN EMPIRICAL ANALYSIS , 1970 .

[3]  R. G. Vickson,et al.  OF FINANCIAL AND QUANTITATIVE ANALYSIS DECEMBER 1975 STOCHASTIC DOMINANCE FOR DECREASING ABSOLUTE RISK AVERSION , 2009 .

[4]  M. A. Girshick,et al.  Theory of games and statistical decisions , 1955 .

[5]  M. Rothschild,et al.  Increasing risk: I. A definition , 1970 .

[6]  Josef Hadar,et al.  Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects , 1969 .

[7]  James R. Wart,et al.  Efficient Algorithms for Conducting Stochastic Dominance Tests on Large Numbers of Portfolios: Reply , 1975, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[8]  E. Lehmann.  Ordered Families of Distributions , 1955 .

[9]  S. Karlin.  Dynamic Inventory Policy with Varying Stochastic Demands , 1960 .

[10]  William Feller,et al.  An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications , 1967 .

[11]  J. Pratt.  RISK AVERSION IN THE SMALL AND IN THE LARGE11This research was supported by the National Science Foundation (grant NSF-G24035). Reproduction in whole or in part is permitted for any purpose of the United States Government. , 1964 .

[12]  K. Arrow,et al.  Aspects of the theory of risk-bearing , 1966 .

[13]  H. Levy,et al.  Efficiency analysis of choices involving risk , 1969 .

[14]  M. R. Osborne,et al.  Methods for unconstrained optimization problems , 1968 .

[15]  Gordon Pye.  The Value of the Call Option on a Bond , 1966, Journal of Political Economy.

[16]  R Burr Porter,et al.  Stochastic Dominance vs. Mean-Variance Portfolio Analysis: An Empirical Evaluation , 1972 .

[17]  Stuart E. Dreyfus,et al.  Applied Dynamic Programming , 1965 .

[18]  R Burr Porter,et al.  A comparison of stochastic dominance and stochastic programming , 1974 .

[19]  Haim Levy,et al.  Relative Effectiveness of Efficiency Criteria for Portfolio Selection , 1970, Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis.

[20]  George L. Nemhauser,et al.  Introduction To Dynamic Programming , 1966 .

[21]  Samuel Karlin,et al.  Polya Type Distributions, II , 1957 .

[22]  V. Bawa.  OPTIMAL, RULES FOR ORDERING UNCERTAIN PROSPECTS+ , 1975 .

[23]  J. Hammond.  Simplifying the Choice between Uncertain Prospects Where Preference is Nonlinear , 1974 .