請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/41763
標題: | 行為財務學觀點下的動態資產配置 Three Essays on Dynamic Asset Allocation: A Behavioral Finance Perspective |
作者: | Chung-Ying Yeh 葉宗穎 |
指導教授: | 鍾經樊(Ching-Fan Chung) |
關鍵字: | 損失趨避,框架效果, 風險反饋,馬可夫轉換, 投資人情緒, 扭曲的信念, dynamic asset allocation, narrow framing/loss aversion, volatility feedback,, |
出版年 : | 2009 |
學位: | 博士 |
摘要: | 摘要
第一章提出了一個一般化的隨機動態風險模型(stochastic volatility model),我們稱為「隨機動態風險反饋模型(stochastic volatility feedback model)」,來研究槓桿效果(leverage effect) 與風險反饋效果(volatility feedback effect)在實證上與經濟上的重要性。在實證方法上,我們使用Gallant and Tauchen (1996)所提出的Efficient Method of Moment(EMM)來估計。在評價實證上的重要性, 我們是比較哪種效果是決定重製風險與報酬cross-correlations 的首要因素。在經濟上的重要性,我們是以動態資產配置的觀點來衡量。主要結果為:風險反饋效果不論在實證上與經濟上的重要性都高於槓桿效果。 第二章我們研究投資人的動態資產配置問題,其中該投資人的偏好包含了損失趨避(loss aversion)與框架效果(narrow framing)。而股票價格的動態是帶有可預期機制的(predictability),既為上一章所提的風險反饋效果(volatility feedback effect)。從理論上我們發現損失趨避與框架效果對投資人資產配置的影響是不同的,其中損失趨避會減少投資人對股票的需求,然而框架效果可以放大或減少對股票的需求,而這決定於投資的輸贏的賠率與心理主觀賠率的相對大 小。主要結果:當有考慮風險反饋效果的可預期機制時,損失趨避與框架效果並不像Barberis, Huang and Santos (2001), Barberis and Thaler (2003)所言的可以解釋equity premium puzzle/participation puzzle。 第三章我們同樣研究投資人的動態資產配置問題,其中該投資人的信念受到心理情緒因素所影響。我們試圖比較不同型態投資人的投資表現。為了比較的一致性與合理性,我們在不完全訊息架構下擴充Campbell, Chan and Viceira (2003)的動態資產配置模型,使其能包含投資人的信念,進而分析能投資組合與評價投資表現。我們主要發現:樂觀的投資人的投資表現是最高的,其次才是貝氏投資人;樂觀投資人的投資策略是較積極的,以在牛市市場有最大獲利做為投資法 則。 Abstract Chapter 1 proposes a general continuous-time stochastic volatility model, the stochastic volatility feedback (SVF) model, to investigate the empirical and economic importance of the leverage and volatility feedback e ects, both of which are the two main explanations for volatility asymmetry. We empirically estimate our model by the Gallant and Tauchen's (1996) e cient method of moment (EMM) approach using S&P 500 index returns. To assess the empirical importance of the leverage and volatility feedback e ects, we calculate the simulated cross-correlations between returns and volatility under various speci cations and the make a comparison to its realistic ones. To evaluate the economic importance, we perform the dynamic asset allocation model under various settings for the budget constraint and then compare the economic performances for the corresponding optimal investment strategies. Our ndings are as follows. (1) On comparing the magnitude of the two e ects, the volatility feedback e ect dominates the leverage e ect empirically. The volatility feedback e ect is the key determinant to replicate the sample cross-correlations between returns and volatility. The conventional stochastic volatility models with/without jumps fail to replication; (2) the volatility feedback e ect drives the intertemporal hedging demand, in contrast, the leverage e ect has a minor e ect on it; (3) a longer investment horizon or a higher current volatility enhance the volatility feedback e ect; (4) ignoring the volatility feedback e ect would su er from tremendous economic loss. In chapter 2, we study the dynamic asset allocation problem in a general framework where the representative investor's preferences include narrow framing/loss aversion parameters while the intertemporal budget constraint contains the empirically-validated volatility feedback e ect. The optimal dynamic allocation of wealth among investment, consumption, and savings can be solved in an analytically tractable way and is found to be profoundly in uenced by the interactions between narrow framing/loss aversion and the volatility feedback e ect. In other words, a more elaborated speci cation of the intertemporal budget constraint including the volatility feedback e ect is indispensable to a complete analysis of narrow framing/loss aversion preferences in a dynamic asset allocation problem. In particular, we nd that introducing narrow framing/loss aversion without the volatility feedback e ect does help reduce investment and transfer the weights to savings, which implies that narrow framing/loss aversion can explain the equity premium puzzle as previous literature has suggested. However, the direction of weight shifts reverses noticeably once the volatility feedback e ect is incorporated. It seems that the preferences of narrow framing/loss aversion alone may not explain the equity premium puzzle in our general framework where the intertemporal budget constraint is more carefully speci ed. In chapter 3, the classical nance theory claimed that irrational investors, who misperceive asset returns, would buy high and sell low, causing them to lose their wealth. The recent researches, such as De Long, Shleifer, Summers and Waldman (1991), and Kogan, Ross, Wang and Wester eld (2006) advocated that irrational investors might form portfolio allocations performing a higher growth rates that outgrow that of the Bayesian investor in market quilibrium. This paper addresses this issue in terms of investor's asset allocation. We conduct the empirical analysis of the investor's asset allocation decision considering psychological biases. We specify a regime-switching dynamics of the investment opportunity set and use regime predicting and updating procedures to characterize investor sentiment. Our ndings are as follows. (i) In comparison with the Bayesian investor, the optimistic one would like to bet on good states of the economy, more aggressively chasing /shorting the assets with higher rewards in good/bad times. In contrast, the pessimistic investor would take the opposite positions to the optimistic one; (ii) the optimistic investor has the best empirical performance of the portfolio allocation and in turn outperforms the Bayesian one. The other irrational investors underperform the Bayesian one in most cases; (iii) while the predictability in the investment opportunity set is removed, the outperformance of the optimistic investor disappears. It suggests that the bene t from the intertemporal hedging induced by the return predictability is a potential explanation to the domination of the optimistic investor in our analysis. |
URI: | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/41763 |
全文授權: | 有償授權 |
顯示於系所單位: | 財務金融學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-98-1.pdf 目前未授權公開取用 | 2.67 MB | Adobe PDF |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。