This proves the second part of equation (21). The proof of proposition 9
is the same for 7 = -∞.
Appendix H: Proof of Proposition 10
For a HARA-based risk function with 1 > 7 > -∞ the FOC (11) resp.
(14) yields
7-1
—% ⅛ — 1 + Si]; V i,ε,
(42)
or
. e,∙^ , . ,, i_ . . . ,
A + -----= (—% K — 1 + si ])7^1; V i,ε- (43)
1 — 7
Aggregating across investors yields A + eε /(1 — 7). Dividing the aggregate
equation by Ai + eiε∕(1 — 7) yields 1∕giε and hence,
1/9ie
=∑(
3 x
1 + Si] ∖ 1-τ
1 + s3'] /
(44)
so that
d(1∕gig) = ^ 1 / —% λ 1-7 / - — 1 + Si ∖ 1-7 1 Sj — si )
dε ʌl — 7 ∖~l∣jJ ∖πε — 1 + sJ K — 1 + s3)2 π ε'
(45)
Assume 7 < 1 and s⅛ ≤ sj Vi. Then πz(ε) < 0 implies d(1∕g⅛ε)∕dε < 0 so
that dghε∕dε > 0.
45
More intriguing information
1. Reputations, Market Structure, and the Choice of Quality Assurance Systems in the Food Industry2. A Duality Approach to Testing the Economic Behaviour of Dairy-Marketing Co-operatives: The Case of Ireland
3. The name is absent
4. REVITALIZING FAMILY FARM AGRICULTURE
5. Education and Development: The Issues and the Evidence
6. Land Police in Mozambique: Future Perspectives
7. The name is absent
8. Can a Robot Hear Music? Can a Robot Dance? Can a Robot Tell What it Knows or Intends to Do? Can it Feel Pride or Shame in Company?
9. Subduing High Inflation in Romania. How to Better Monetary and Exchange Rate Mechanisms?
10. ARE VOLATILITY EXPECTATIONS CHARACTERIZED BY REGIME SHIFTS? EVIDENCE FROM IMPLIED VOLATILITY INDICES