Refine
Year of publication
- 2010 (4) (remove)
Language
- English (4)
Keywords
- Asymptotic safety (1)
- Bubbles (1)
- Cash additivity (1)
- Cash flows (1)
- Cash subadditivity (1)
- Discounting ambiguity (1)
- Dynamic convex risk measures (1)
- Dynamic penalization (1)
- Model ambiguity (1)
- Robust representation (1)
Project
- E9 (4) (remove)
Application Area
- E (4) (remove)
We study the risk assessment of uncertain cash flows in terms of dynamic convex risk measures for processes as introduced in Cheridito, Delbaen, and Kupper (2006). These risk measures take into account not only the amounts but also the timing of a cash flow. We discuss their robust representation in terms of suitably penalized probability measures on the optional $\sigma$-field. This yields an explicit analysis both of model and discounting ambiguity. We focus on supermartingale criteria for time consistency. In particular we show how ``bubbles'' may appear in the dynamic penalization, and how they cause a breakdown of asymptotic safety of the risk assessment procedure.
Dynamic risk measures
(2010)
This paper gives an overview of the theory of dynamic convex risk measures for random variables in discrete time setting. We summarize robust representation results of conditional convex risk measures, and we characterize various time consistency properties of dynamic risk measures in terms of acceptance sets, penalty functions, and by supermartingale properties of risk processes and penalty functions.
The classical valuation of an uncertain cash flow in discrete time consists in taking the expectation of the sum of the discounted future payoffs under a fixed probability measure, which is assumed to be known. Here we discuss the valuation problem in the context of Knightian uncertainty. Using results from the theory of convex risk measures, but without assuming the existence of a global reference measure, we derive a robust representation of concave valuations with an infinite time horizon, which specifies the interplay between model uncertainty and uncertainty about the time value of money.
Under market frictions like illiquidity or transaction costs, contingent claims
can incorporate some inevitable intrinsic risk that cannot be completely hedged
away but remains with the holder. In general, they cannot be synthesized by
dynamical trading in liquid assets and hence not be priced by no-arbitrage arguments alone. Still, an agent can determine a valuation with respect to her
preferences towards risk. The utility indifference value for a variation in the
quantity of illiquid assets held by the agent is defined as the compensating variation
of wealth, under which her maximal expected utility remains unchanged.