Search Results (7)

This paper proposes a novel robustness framework for studying the unit elasticity of intertemporal substitution (EIS) assumption based on the Perron-Frobenius sieve estimation model by Christensen, 2017. The sieve nonparametric decomposition is a central model that connects key strands of the long run risk literature and recovers the stochastic discount factor (SDF) under the unit EIS assumption. I generate various economies based on Epstein–Zin preferences to simulate scenarios where the EIS deviates from unity. Then, I study the main estimation mechanism of the decomposition as well as the time discount factor and the risk aversion parameter estimation surface. The results demonstrate the robustness of estimating the average yield, change of measure, and preference parameters but also reveal an “absorption effect” arising from the unit EIS assumption. The findings highlight that asset pricing models assuming a unit EIS produce distorted parameter estimates, caution researchers about the potential under- or over-estimation of risk aversion, and provide insight into trends of misestimation when interpreting the results. I also identify an additional source of failure from a consumption component, which demonstrates a more general limit of the consumption-based capital asset pricing model and the structure used to estimate relevant preference parameters. Full article

This study addresses the crucial but under-explored topic of ambiguity aversion, i.e., model misspecification, in the area of environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) within portfolio decisions. It considers a risk- and ambiguity-averse investor allocating resources to a risk-free asset, a market index, a green stock, and a brown stock. The study employs a robust control approach rooted in relative entropy to account for model misspecification and derive closed-form optimal investment strategies. The key contribution of this study includes demonstrating, using two sets of empirical data on asset returns and ESG ratings, the substantial influence of ambiguity on optimal trading strategies, particularly highlighting the differential effects of market, green, and brown ambiguities. As a by-product of our analytical solutions, the study contrasts ambiguity-averse investors with their non-ambiguity counterparts, revealing more cautious risk exposures with a reduction in short-selling positions for the former. Furthermore, three types of investors who employ popular suboptimal strategies are identified, together with two loss measures used to quantify their performance. The findings reveal that popular strategies, not accounting for ESG and misspecification in the model, could lead to significant financial costs, with the extent of loss varying depending on those two factors: investors’ ambiguity aversion profiles and ESG preferences. Full article

Often in the planning phase of a clinical trial, a researcher will need to choose between a standard versus weighted log-rank test (LRT) for investigating right-censored survival data. While a standard LRT is optimal for analyzing evenly distributed but distinct survival events (proportional hazards), an appropriately weighted LRT test may be better suited for handling non-proportional, delayed treatment effects. The “a priori” misspecification of this alternative may result in a substantial loss of power when determining the effectiveness of an experimental drug. In this paper, the standard unweighted and inverse log-rank tests (iLRTs) are compared with the multiple weight, default Max-Combo procedure for analyzing differential late survival outcomes. Unlike combination LRTs that depend on the arbitrary selection of weights, the iLRT by definition is a single weight test and does not require implicit multiplicity correction. Empirically, both weighted methods have reasonable flexibility for assessing continuous survival curve differences from the onset of a study. However, the iLRT may be preferable for accommodating delayed separating survival curves, especially when one arm finishes first. Using standard large-sample methods, the power and sample size for the iLRT are easily estimated without resorting to complex and timely simulations. Full article

Factor analysis is one of the most important statistical tools for analyzing multivariate data (i.e., items) in the social sciences. An essential case is the comparison of multiple groups on a one-dimensional factor variable that can be interpreted as a summary of the items. The assumption of measurement invariance is a frequently employed assumption that enables the comparison of the factor variable across groups. This article discusses different estimation methods of the multiple-group one-dimensional factor model under violations of measurement invariance (i.e., measurement noninvariance). In detail, joint estimation, linking methods, and regularized estimation approaches are treated. It is argued that linking approaches and regularization approaches can be equivalent to joint estimation approaches if appropriate (robust) loss functions are employed. Each of the estimation approaches defines identification constraints of parameters that quantify violations of measurement invariance. We argue in the discussion section that the fitted multiple-group one-dimensional factor analysis will likely be misspecified due to the violation of measurement invariance. Hence, because there is always indeterminacy in determining group comparisons of the factor variable under noninvariance, the preference of particular fitting strategies such as partial invariance over alternatives is unjustified. In contrast, researchers purposely define fitting functions that minimize the extent of model misspecification due to the choice of a particular (robust) loss function. Full article

Estimating the non-market monetary values of urban amenities has become commonplace in urban planning research, particularly following Rosen’s seminal article on hedonic theory in 1974. As a revealed preference method, the hedonic approach decouples the market price of a house into price components that are attributable to housing characteristics. Despite the potential contribution of this theory in a planning context, three main limitations exist in the conventional applications: (1) variable measurement issues, (2) model misspecification, and (3) the problematic common use of global regression. These flaws problematically skew our understanding of the urban structure and spatial distribution of amenities, leading to misinformed policy interventions and poor amenity planning decisions. In this article, we propose a coherent conceptual framework that addresses measurement, specification, and scale challenges to generate consistent economic estimates of local amenities. Finally, we argue that, by paying greater attention to the spatial equity of amenity values, governments can provide greater equality of opportunities in cities. Full article

This paper extends the canonical small open-economy real-business-cycle model, when considering model uncertainty. Domestic households have multiplier preferences, which leads them to take robust decisions in response to possible model misspecification for the economy’s aggregate productivity. Using perturbation methods, the paper extends the literature on real business cycle models by deriving a closed-form solution for the combined welfare effect of the two sources of uncertainty, namely risk and model uncertainty. While classical risk has an ambiguous effect on welfare, the addition of model uncertainty is unambiguously welfare-deteriorating. Hence, the overall effect of uncertainty on welfare is ambiguous, depending on consumers preferences and model parameters. The paper provides numerical results for the welfare effects of uncertainty measured by units of consumption equivalence. At moderate (high) levels of risk aversion, the effect of risk on household welfare is positive (negative). The addition of model uncertainty—for all levels of concern about model uncertainty and most risk aversion values—turns the overall effect of uncertainty on household welfare negative. It is important to remark that the analytical decomposition and combination of the effects of the two types of uncertainty considered here and the resulting ambiguous effect on overall welfare have not been derived in the previous literature on small open economies. Full article

This paper investigates the approximated arbitrage bounds of option prices in an incomplete market setting and draws implications for option pricing and risk management. It gives consideration to periods of global financial crisis and European sovereign debt crisis. To this end, we employ the gain-loss ratio method combined with the market-implied risk-neutral distribution calculated by binomial tree to investigate the options price bounds. Our implied gain-loss bounds of option prices are preference-free and parametric-free to avoid the misspecification error of subjective choice on the benchmark model of gain-loss ratio, and consequently, greatly reduce model risk and market risk. The empirical results show that there are option prices breaking the gain-loss bounds, even after taking into account the market information. This means that a good risk management technique and good-deal investment opportunities exist if the implied binomial tree is used as a benchmark model in the gain-loss bounds. Full article