• norsk
    • English
  • English 
    • norsk
    • English
  • Login
View Item 
  •   Home
  • Norges Handelshøyskole
  • Department of Business and Management Science
  • Discussion papers (FOR)
  • View Item
  •   Home
  • Norges Handelshøyskole
  • Department of Business and Management Science
  • Discussion papers (FOR)
  • View Item
JavaScript is disabled for your browser. Some features of this site may not work without it.

Two paradigms and Nobel prizes in economics : a contradiction or coexistence?

Levy, Haim; De Giorgi, Enrico; Hens, Thorsten
Working paper
Thumbnail
View/Open
levy haim 0903.pdf (462.0Kb)
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/11250/163721
Date
2003-06
Metadata
Show full item record
Collections
  • Discussion papers (FOR) [556]
Abstract
Markowitz and Sharpe won the Nobel Prize in Economics more than a decade ago for the development of Mean-Variance analysis and the Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM). In the year 2002, Kahneman won the Nobel Prize in Economics for the development of Prospect Theory. Can these two apparently contradictory paradigms coexist? In deriving the CAPM, Sharpe, Lintner and Mossin assume expected utility (EU) maximization following the approach proposed by Markowitz, normal distributions and risk aversion. Kahneman & Tversky suggest Prospect Theory (PT) and Cumulative Prospect Theory (CPT) as an alternative paradigm to EU theory. They show that investors distort probabilities, make decisions based on change of wealth, exhibit loss aversion and maximize the expectation of an S-shaped value function which contains a risk-seeking segment. Employing change of wealth rather than total wealth contradicts EU theory. The subjective distortion of probabilities violates the CAPM assumptions of normality and homogeneous expectations, and the S-shaped value function violates the risk aversion assumption. We prove in this paper that although CPT (and PT) is in conflict to EUT, and violates some of the CAPM’s underlying assumptions, the security market line theorem (SMLT) of the CAPM is intact in the CPT framework.
Publisher
Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration. Department of Finance and Management Science
Series
Discussion paper
2003:9

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit
 

 

Browse

ArchiveCommunities & CollectionsBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournalsThis CollectionBy Issue DateAuthorsTitlesSubjectsDocument TypesJournals

My Account

Login

Statistics

View Usage Statistics

Contact Us | Send Feedback

Privacy policy
DSpace software copyright © 2002-2019  DuraSpace

Service from  Unit