
doi: 10.1002/fut.2210
AbstractThis article examines the effect of disappointment aversion on futures hedging. We incorporated a constant‐absolute‐risk‐aversion (CARA) utility function into the disappointment‐aversion framework of Gul (1991). It is shown that a more disappointment‐averse hedger will choose an optimal futures position closer to the minimum‐variance hedge than will a less‐disappointment‐averse hedger. The effect of disappointment aversion is stronger when the hedger is less risk averse. A small disappointment aversion will cause a near‐risk neutral hedger to take a drastically different position. In addition, a more‐risk‐averse or disappointment‐averse hedger will have a lower reference point. Numerical results indicate that the reference point of a disappointment‐averse hedger tends to be lower than that of a conventional loss‐averse hedger. Consequently, the disappointment‐averse hedger will act more conservatively, not exploiting profitable opportunities as much as the conventional loss averse hedger will. © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Jrl Fut Mark 22:123–141, 2002
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 9 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
