arXivDaily arXiv每日学术速递 周一至周五更新
arXiv周末暂无论文更新,休息一下吧,周末愉快~~
arXiv 1107.0838q-fin.GN
收藏

多元化风险在金融泡沫中的作用

Role of Diversification Risk in Financial Bubbles

Wanfeng Yan, Ryan Woodard, Didier Sornette

摘要:

我们提出了一个扩展的Johansen-Ledoit-Sornette(JLS)模型,包括一个额外的定价因子称为“Zipf因子”,它描述了分散风险的股票市场投资组合。新模型保留了JLS模型中描述的泡沫的所有动力学特征,提供了关于股票收益随时间集中的额外信息。这使得我们能够更好地理解风险分散,并解释投资者在泡沫产生过程中的行为。我们将这一新模型应用于2006年8月至2007年10月(泡沫1)和2008年10月至2009年8月(泡沫2)这两个著名的中国股市泡沫。泡沫1的Zipf因子非常显著,这与估值收益更多地集中在上证指数的大型公司这一事实相对应。中国媒体和论坛对80-20规则的广泛认可,可能导致许多投资者低估了缺乏多元化的风险,从而增强了Zipf因素的作用。对于泡沫2,Zipf因子被发现与之无关,这表明小公司的市场收益权重更大。我们将这一结果解释为中国经济对2008年金融危机后中国政府提供的大规模刺激措施的反应。

英文摘要:

We present an extension of the Johansen-Ledoit-Sornette (JLS) model to include an additional pricing factor called the "Zipf factor", which describes the diversification risk of the stock market portfolio. Keeping all the dynamical characteristics of a bubble described in the JLS model, the new model provides additional information about the concentration of stock gains over time. This allows us to understand better the risk diversification and to explain the investors' behavior during the bubble generation. We apply this new model to two famous Chinese stock bubbles, from August 2006 to October 2007 (bubble 1) and from October 2008 to August 2009 (bubble 2). The Zipf factor is found highly significant for bubble 1, corresponding to the fact that valuation gains were more concentrated on the large firms of the Shanghai index. It is likely that the widespread acknowledgement of the 80-20 rule in the Chinese media and discussion forums led many investors to discount the risk of a lack of diversification, therefore enhancing the role of the Zipf factor. For bubble 2, the Zipf factor is found marginally relevant, suggesting a larger weight of market gains on small firms. We interpret this result as the consequence of the response of the Chinese economy to the very large stimulus provided by the Chinese government in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis.

机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来,可能存在错误,请以论文正文为准。

↑