Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Assistant
AI Research Assistant
Well-researched responses based on relevant abstracts and paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses.
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 80 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 55 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 32 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 28 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 104 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 194 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 452 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4.5 29 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Risk exchange under infinite-mean Pareto models (2403.20171v2)

Published 24 Mar 2024 in q-fin.RM

Abstract: We study the optimal decisions and equilibria of agents who aim to minimize their risks by allocating their positions over extremely heavy-tailed (i.e., infinite-mean) and possibly dependent losses. The loss distributions of our focus are super-Pareto distributions, which include the class of extremely heavy-tailed Pareto distributions. Using a recent result on stochastic dominance, we show that for a portfolio of super-Pareto losses, non-diversification is preferred by decision makers equipped with well-defined and monotone risk measures. The phenomenon that diversification is not beneficial in the presence of super-Pareto losses is further illustrated by an equilibrium analysis in a risk exchange market. First, agents with super-Pareto losses will not share risks in a market equilibrium. Second, transferring losses from agents bearing super-Pareto losses to external parties without any losses may arrive at an equilibrium which benefits every party involved.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (35)
  1. Axtell, R. L. (2001). Zipf distribution of U.S. firm sizes. Science, 293:1818–1820.
  2. Residual life time at great age. Annals of Probability, 2:792–804.
  3. Consistent tests for stochastic dominance. Econometrica, 71(1):71–104.
  4. Tail index estimation and an exponential regression model. Extremes, 2(2):177–200.
  5. Tail risk in commercial property insurance. Risks, 2(4):393–410.
  6. Some concepts of negative dependence. Annals of Probability, 10(3): 765–772.
  7. A concept of negative dependence using stochastic ordering. Statistics and Probability Letters, 3(2):81–86.
  8. Fraud power laws. Journal of Accounting Research, forthcoming.
  9. Tail risk of contagious diseases. Nature Physics, 16(6):606–613.
  10. Clark, D. R. (2013). A note on the upper-truncated Pareto distribution. Casualty Actuarial Society E-Forum, Winter, 2013, Volume 1, pp. 1–22.
  11. Robustness and sensitivity analysis of risk measurement procedures. Quantitative Finance, 10(6):593–606.
  12. Capital requirements for cyber risk and cyber risk insurance: An analysis of Solvency II, the US risk-based capital standards, and the Swiss Solvency Test. North American Actuarial Journal, 24(3):370–392.
  13. What are the actual costs of cyber risk events? European Journal of Operational Research, 272(3):1109–1119.
  14. Extreme value theory as a risk management tool. North American Actuarial Journal, 3(2):30–41.
  15. The canonical model space for law-invariant convex risk measures is L1superscript𝐿1L^{1}italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. Mathematical Finance, 22(3):585–589.
  16. FINMA (2021). Standardmodell Versicherungen (Standard Model Insurance): Technical description for the SST standard model non-life insurance (in German), October 31, 2021, www.finma.ch.
  17. The empirical reality of IT project cost overruns: Discovering a power-law distribution. Journal of Management Information Systems, 39(3):607–639.
  18. Convex measures of risk and trading constraints. Finance and Stochastics, 6(4):429–447.
  19. North American Actuarial Journal, forthcoming.
  20. Gabaix, X. (1999). Zipf’s law and the growth of cities. American Economic Review, 89(2):129–132.
  21. Rank-1/2: A simple way to improve the OLS estimation of tail exponents. Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 29(1):24–39.
  22. Statistical review of nuclear power accidents. Asia-Pacific Journal of Risk and Insurance, 7(1), Article 1.
  23. Heavy-Tailed Distributions and Robustness in Economics and Finance, Vol. 214 of Lecture Notes in Statistics, Springer.
  24. Quantitative Risk Management: Concepts, Techniques and Tools. Revised Edition. Princeton University Press.
  25. Moscadelli, M. (2004). The modelling of operational risk: Experience with the analysis of the data collected by the Basel committee. Technical Report 517. SSRN: 557214.
  26. Infinite mean models and the LDA for operational risk. Journal of Operational Risk, 1(1):3–25.
  27. Nordhaus, W. D. (2009). An analysis of the Dismal Theorem, Yale University: Cowles Foundation Discussion Paper 1686.
  28. OECD. (2018). The Contribution of Reinsurance Markets to Managing Catastrophe Risk. Available at www.oecd.org.
  29. Pickands, J. (1975). Statistical inference using extreme order statistics. Annals of Statistics, 3:119–131.
  30. Rizzo, M. L. (2009). New goodness-of-fit tests for Pareto distributions. ASTIN Bulletin, 39(2):691–715.
  31. Stochastic Orders. Springer.
  32. The size distribution of innovations revisited: An application of extreme value statistics to citation and value measures of patent significance. Journal of Econometrics, 139(2):318–339.
  33. Exploring the limits of safety analysis in complex technological systems. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 6:59–66.
  34. Tasche, D. (2000). Conditional expectation as quantile derivative. arXiv: 0104190.
  35. Distortion riskmetrics on general spaces. ASTIN Bulletin, 50(3):827–851.
Citations (3)

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Lightbulb Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Continue Learning

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets

This paper has been mentioned in 1 post and received 0 likes.