The prospect theory of Kahneman and Tversky (in Econometrica 47(2), 263–291, 1979) and the cumulative prospect theory of Tversky and Kahneman (in J. Risk uncertainty 5, 297–323, 1992) are descriptive models for decision making that summarize several violations of the expected utility theory. This paper gives a survey of applications of prospect theory to the portfolio choice problem and the implications for asset pricing. We demonstrate that prospect theory (and similarly cumulative prospect theory) has to be re-modelled if one wants to apply it to portfolio selection. We suggest replacing the piecewise power value function of Tversky and Kahneman (in J. Risk uncertainty 5, 297–323, 1992) with a piecewise negative exponential value function. This latter functional form is still compatible with laboratory experiments but it has the following advantages over and above Tversky and Kahneman’s piecewise power function:

1. The Bernoulli Paradox does not arise for lotteries with finite expected value.

2. No infinite leverage/robustness problem arises.

3. CAPM-equilibria with heterogeneous investors and prospect utility do exist.

4. It is able to simultaneously resolve the following asset pricing puzzles: the equity premium, the value and the size puzzle.

In contrast to the piecewise power value function it is able to explain the disposition effect.

Resolving these problems of prospect theory we show how it can be combined with mean–variance portfolio theory.

Giorgi, Enrico De; Hens, Thorsten (2006). *Making prospect theory fit for finance.* Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, 20(3):339-360.

## Abstract

The prospect theory of Kahneman and Tversky (in Econometrica 47(2), 263–291, 1979) and the cumulative prospect theory of Tversky and Kahneman (in J. Risk uncertainty 5, 297–323, 1992) are descriptive models for decision making that summarize several violations of the expected utility theory. This paper gives a survey of applications of prospect theory to the portfolio choice problem and the implications for asset pricing. We demonstrate that prospect theory (and similarly cumulative prospect theory) has to be re-modelled if one wants to apply it to portfolio selection. We suggest replacing the piecewise power value function of Tversky and Kahneman (in J. Risk uncertainty 5, 297–323, 1992) with a piecewise negative exponential value function. This latter functional form is still compatible with laboratory experiments but it has the following advantages over and above Tversky and Kahneman’s piecewise power function:

1. The Bernoulli Paradox does not arise for lotteries with finite expected value.

2. No infinite leverage/robustness problem arises.

3. CAPM-equilibria with heterogeneous investors and prospect utility do exist.

4. It is able to simultaneously resolve the following asset pricing puzzles: the equity premium, the value and the size puzzle.

In contrast to the piecewise power value function it is able to explain the disposition effect.

Resolving these problems of prospect theory we show how it can be combined with mean–variance portfolio theory.

## Citations

## Altmetrics

## Additional indexing

Item Type: | Journal Article, refereed, original work |
---|---|

Communities & Collections: | 03 Faculty of Economics > Department of Banking and Finance |

Dewey Decimal Classification: | 330 Economics |

Language: | English |

Date: | 1 September 2006 |

Deposited On: | 17 Jul 2014 10:26 |

Last Modified: | 05 Apr 2016 17:58 |

Publisher: | Springer |

ISSN: | 1934-4554 |

Publisher DOI: | https://doi.org/10.1007/s11408-006-0019-1 |

Official URL: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11408-006-0019-1 |

Other Identification Number: | merlin-id:3445 |

## Download

Full text not available from this repository.View at publisher

TrendTerms displays relevant terms of the abstract of this publication and related documents on a map. The terms and their relations were extracted from ZORA using word statistics. Their timelines are taken from ZORA as well. The bubble size of a term is proportional to the number of documents where the term occurs. Red, orange, yellow and green colors are used for terms that occur in the current document; red indicates high interlinkedness of a term with other terms, orange, yellow and green decreasing interlinkedness. Blue is used for terms that have a relation with the terms in this document, but occur in other documents.

You can navigate and zoom the map. Mouse-hovering a term displays its timeline, clicking it yields the associated documents.