Abstract

This paper studies finite-horizon consumption-portfolio decisions with recursive utility. We show that the parameter seemingly representing the individual’s bequest preference in traditional recursive utility formulations is quantitatively and qualitatively misleading. The parameter value is uninformative about the optimal bequest which, in some cases, is even inversely related to the magnitude of the apparent bequest weight. We argue that the ratio between optimal bequest and the optimal consumption rate just before the terminal date is a much better representation of the strength of the bequest motive. Numerical examples illustrate the pitfalls using the traditional specification and clarifies how the bequest preference affects optimal decisions and the life-cycle patterns of consumption and wealth assuming constant investment opportunities or stochastic interest rates. We show that the typical utility representation for a unit elasticity of intertemporal substitution actually assumes a strong bequest preference.

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.