Abstract

This paper studies the impact of Value at Risk (VaR) constraints on investors with hyperbolic absolute risk aversion (HARA) risk preferences. We derive closed-form representations for the “triplet”: optimal investment, terminal wealth, and value function, via extending the Bellman-based methodology from constant relative risk aversion (CRRA) utilities to HARA utilities. In the numerical part, we compare our solution (HARA-VaR) to three critical embedded cases, namely, CRRA, CRRA-VaR, and HARA, assessing the influence of key parameters like the VaR probability and floor on the optimal wealth distribution and allocations. The comparison highlights a stronger impact of VaR on a CRRA-VaR investor compared to a HARA-VaR (HV). This is in terms of not only lower Sharpe ratios but also higher tail risk and lower returns on wealth. The HV analysis demonstrates that combining both, capital guarantee and VaR, may lead to a correction of the partially adverse effects of the VaR constraint on the risk appetite. Moreover, the HV portfolio strategy also does not show the high kurtosis observed for the PV strategy. A wealth-equivalent loss (WEL) analysis is also implemented demonstrating that, for a HV investor, losses would be more serious if adopting a CRRA-VaR strategy as compared to a HARA strategy.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

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