Showing posts with label Risk aversion. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Risk aversion. Show all posts

Investment Decision under Uncertainty

Uncertainty refers to a situation in which a decision is expected to yield more than one outcome and the probability of none of the possible outcomes is known. Therefore, decisions taken under uncertainty are necessarily subjective. However, analysis have devised some decision rules to impart some objectively to the subjective decisions, provided decision-makers are able to identify the possible ‘states of nature’ and can estimate the outcome of each strategy. Some such important decision rules are discussed below:

1. Wald’s maximum decision criterion

Wald’s maximum decision criterion says that the decision-makers should first specify the worst possible outcome of each strategy and accept a strategy that gives best out of the worst outcomes. It gives a conservative decision rule for risk avoidance. However, this decision rule can be applied by those investors who fall in the category of risk averters. This investment rule can also be applied by firms whose very survival depends on avoiding losses.

2. Minimax regret criterion

Minimax regret criterion is another decision rule under uncertainty. This criterion suggests that the decision-makers should select a strategy that minimizes the maximum regret of a wrong decision. What is regret? “Regret is measured by the difference between the pay-off of a given strategy and the pay-off of the best strategy under the same state of nature. Thus, regret is the opportunity cost of a decision.

3. Hurwicz decision criterion

Hurwicz has suggested another criterion for investment decision under uncertainty. In his opinion, full realization of optimistic pay-off or full realization of most pessimistic pay-off is a rare phenomenon. The actual pay-off of a strategy lies somewhere between the two extreme situations. According to Hurwicz criterion, therefore, the decision-makers need to construct a decision index of most optimistic and most pessimistic pay-offs of each alternative strategy. The decision index is, in fact, a weighted average of maximum possible and minimum possible pay-offs, weight being their subjective probability such that sum of probabilities of maximum (Max) and minimum (Min) pay-offs equals one.

4. Laplace decision criterion

The Laplace criterion uses the Bayesian rule to calculate the expected value of each strategy. As mentioned earlier, Bayesian rule says that where meaningful estimate of probabilities is not available, the outcome of each strategy under each state of nature must be assigned the same probability and that the sum of probabilities of outcome of each strategy must add up to one. For this reason, the Laplace criterion is also called the ‘Bayesian criterion’. By assuming equal probability for all events, the environment of ‘uncertainty’ is converted into an environment of ‘risk’.

Once this decision rule is accepted, then decision-makers can apply the decision criteria that are applied under the condition of risk. The most common method used for the purpose is to calculate the ‘expected value’ as defined in the case of pay-off matrix in section. Once expected value of each strategy is worked out, then the strategy with the highest expected value is selected.

This decision rule avoids the problem that arises due to subjectivity in assuming a probability of pay-off. This criterion is, therefore, regarded as the criterion of rationality because it is free from a decision-makers attitude towards risk.

To sum up, uncertainty is an important factor in investment decisions but there is no unique method of dealing with uncertainty. There are several ways of making investment decisions under the condition of uncertainty. None of the methods as described above lead to a flawless decision. However, they do add some degree of certainty to decision-making. The choice of method depends on the availability of necessary data and reliability of a method under different conditions.

 You may also like to read:                 

Utility and Risk Aversion in Investment Decision

The assumption of risk aversion is basic to many decision models in managerial economics. Because this assumption is too crucial, it is appropriate to examine attitudes toward risk and discuss why risk aversion might hold in general.

1. Possible risk attitudes

In this theory, three possible attitudes towards risk are presented as aversion to risk, indifference to risk, and preference for risk. Risk aversion characteristics individuals who seek to avoid or minimize risk. Risk neutrality characteristics decision makers focus on expected returns and disregard the dispersion returns (risk). Risk seeking characteristics decision makers prefer risk. Given a choice between more risky and less risky investments with identical expected monetary returns, a risk averter select the less risky investment and a risk seeker select the riskier investment. Faced with the same choice, the risk-neutral investor is indifferent between the two investment projects.

Given the importance of attitudes towards risk in economic decision making, it is important to ask what factors are involved in the determination of such attitudes. Managerial economics tends to presume that the majority of economic participants are risk averters, and it makes this presumption on the basis of the principle of diminishing marginal utility of money.

2. Relation between money and its utility

At the heart of risk aversion is the notion of diminishing marginal utility for money. If someone with no money receives $5000, it can satisfy his or her most immediate needs. If such a person then receives a second $5000, it will obviously be useful, but the second $5000 is not quite so necessary at the first $5000. Thus, the value or utility of the second or marginal $5000 is less than the utility of the first $5000 and so on. Consequently, diminishing marginal utility of money implies that the marginal utility of money income or wealth diminishes for additional increments of money.

Now, if this principle holds generally then it has an important implication for attitudes towards a 50/50 risk of gaining or losing a given monetary amount. This is that the extra benefit from making an equally likely gain is less than the loss of benefit from enduring an equality likely loss. For this reason, the diminishing marginal utility of money tends to make for risk aversion.

3. Adjusting the valuation model for risk

To the extent that diminishing marginal utility leads directly to risk aversion, then this risk aversion can be reflected in the basic valuation model used to determine the worth of a firm. If a managerial decision affects the firm’s risk level, the value of the firm is affected. Two primary methods are used to adjust the basic valuation model to account for decision making under conditions of uncertainty.

Under conditions of risk, the profits shown in the numerator of the valuation model as π equal the expected value of profits during each future period. This expected value is the best available estimate of the amount to be earned during any given period. However, since profits cannot be predicted with absolute precision, some variability is to be anticipated. If the firm must choose between two alternative methods of operation, one with high expected profits and high risk and another with smaller expected profits and lower risks, some technique must be available for making the alternative investments comparable. An appropriate ranking and selection of projects is possible only if each respective investment project can be adjusted for considerations of both time value of money and risk.

4. Certainty equivalent adjustment

The certainty equivalent method is an adjustment to the numerator of the basic valuation model to account for risk. Under the certainty equivalent approach, decision makers specify the certain sum that they are comparable to the expected value of a risky investment alternative. The certainty equivalent of an expected risk amount typically differs in monetary terms but not in terms of the amount of utility provided.

5. Risk-adjusted discounts rates

Another way to incorporate risk in managerial decision making is to adjust the discount rate of denominator of the basic valuation model equation (iii). Like certainty equivalent factors, risk-adjusted discount rates are based on the trade off between risk and return for individual investors.

Click on following links for more details: