Technical Report: CES-497 A summary for the Brock and Hommes Heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos in a simple asset pricing model 1998 JEDC paper

Similar documents
Does the uptick rule stabilize the stock market? Insights from adaptive rational equilibrium dynamics

Lecture One. Dynamics of Moving Averages. Tony He University of Technology, Sydney, Australia

Heterogeneous Agent Models Lecture 1. Introduction Rational vs. Agent Based Modelling Heterogeneous Agent Modelling

Complex Evolutionary Systems in Behavioral Finance

Limitations of demand constraints in stabilising financial markets with heterogeneous beliefs.

Economics, Complexity and Agent Based Models

ASSET PRICING AND WEALTH DYNAMICS AN ADAPTIVE MODEL WITH HETEROGENEOUS AGENTS

A Nonlinear Structural Model for Volatility Clustering

Investments for the Short and Long Run

Asymmetry of Technical Analysis and Market Price Volatility

COMPARING NEURAL NETWORK AND REGRESSION MODELS IN ASSET PRICING MODEL WITH HETEROGENEOUS BELIEFS

EFFECTS OF CONTRARIAN INVESTOR TYPE IN ASSET PRICE DYNAMICS

Market Liquidity and Performance Monitoring The main idea The sequence of events: Technology and information

Dynamic Forecasting Rules and the Complexity of Exchange Rate Dynamics

Is the Extension of Trading Hours Always Beneficial? An Artificial Agent-Based Analysis

The Nonlinear Real Interest Rate Growth Model: USA

Heterogeneous expectations and asset price dynamics

A Heterogenous Agent Foundation for Tests of Asset Price Bubbles

AGGREGATION OF HETEROGENEOUS BELIEFS AND ASSET PRICING: A MEAN-VARIANCE ANALYSIS

Behavioural heterogeneity in ASX 200

1 The Solow Growth Model

Monetary Policy under Behavioral Expectations: Theory and Experiment

MARKET DEPTH AND PRICE DYNAMICS: A NOTE

Gamma. The finite-difference formula for gamma is

A DYNAMIC ANALYSIS OF MOVING AVERAGE RULES. *School of Finance and Economics University of Technology, Sydney PO Box 123 Broadway NSW 2007, Australia

Price Discovery in Agent-Based Computational Modeling of Artificial Stock Markets

Animal Spirits in the Foreign Exchange Market

Graduate School of Information Sciences, Tohoku University Aoba-ku, Sendai , Japan

The test has 13 questions. Answer any four. All questions carry equal (25) marks.

Recent Developments in Asset Pricing with Heterogeneous Beliefs and Adaptive Behaviour of Financial Markets

Expectations structure in asset pricing experiments

Hedging with Life and General Insurance Products

Chapter 9 Dynamic Models of Investment

Monetary and Fiscal Policy Design at the Zero Lower Bound: Evidence from the lab

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Technical Analysis in Financial Markets Griffioen, G.A.W. Link to publication

effect on foreign exchange dynamics as transaction taxes. Transaction taxes seek to curb

CHOICE THEORY, UTILITY FUNCTIONS AND RISK AVERSION

Evolution of Market Heuristics

Strategic Trading of Informed Trader with Monopoly on Shortand Long-Lived Information

Microeconomic Theory August 2013 Applied Economics. Ph.D. PRELIMINARY EXAMINATION MICROECONOMIC THEORY. Applied Economics Graduate Program

An Agent-Based Simulation of Stock Market to Analyze the Influence of Trader Characteristics on Financial Market Phenomena

Financial Mathematics III Theory summary

Optimizing Portfolios

Mathematics in Finance

Why Do Agency Theorists Misinterpret Market Monitoring?

Suggested Solutions to Assignment 7 (OPTIONAL)

Estimating skewness persistence in market returns

arxiv: v1 [math.oc] 23 Dec 2010

Final Exam. Consumption Dynamics: Theory and Evidence Spring, Answers

Asset Price Dynamics with Heterogeneous Beliefs and Local Network Interactions

Aggregation with a double non-convex labor supply decision: indivisible private- and public-sector hours

Consumption and Asset Pricing

Butter Mountains, Milk Lakes and Optimal Price Limiters

The Impact of Short-Selling Constraints on Financial Market Stability in a Heterogeneous Agents Model

Chaos Barometer. Chaos Measurement Oscillator for Financial Markets.

Journal of Economic Dynamics & Control

Government Debt, the Real Interest Rate, Growth and External Balance in a Small Open Economy

Valuation Models and Asset Returns

Markets Do Not Select For a Liquidity Preference as Behavior Towards Risk

A No-Arbitrage Theorem for Uncertain Stock Model

Identification and Estimation of Dynamic Games when Players Beliefs are not in Equilibrium

Emergent Volatility in Asset Markets

Monetary policy and the yield curve

Characterization of the Optimum

Short & Long Run impact of volatility on the effect monetary shocks

Microscopic Models of Financial Markets

Carnets d ordres pilotés par des processus de Hawkes

ACTIVE FISCAL, PASSIVE MONEY EQUILIBRIUM IN A PURELY BACKWARD-LOOKING MODEL

Appendix to: AMoreElaborateModel

Asymmetric Information: Walrasian Equilibria, and Rational Expectations Equilibria

Schizophrenic Representative Investors

Universal Properties of Financial Markets as a Consequence of Traders Behavior: an Analytical Solution

Practical example of an Economic Scenario Generator

Exploring Financial Instability Through Agent-based Modeling Part 2: Time Series, Adaptation, and Survival

On Existence of Equilibria. Bayesian Allocation-Mechanisms

Ambiguous Information and Trading Volume in stock market

PART II IT Methods in Finance

Optimal Unemployment Insurance in a Search Model with Variable Human Capital

WORKING PAPERS IN ECONOMICS & ECONOMETRICS. Bounds on the Return to Education in Australia using Ability Bias

Finance when no one believes the textbooks. Roy Batchelor Director, Cass EMBA Dubai Cass Business School, London

The Value of Information in Central-Place Foraging. Research Report

Infrastructure and Urban Primacy: A Theoretical Model. Jinghui Lim 1. Economics Urban Economics Professor Charles Becker December 15, 2005

An Asset Pricing Model with Loss Aversion and its Stylized Facts

Theory Appendix for: Buyer-Seller Relationships in International Trade: Evidence from U.S. State Exports and Business-Class Travel

Financial Economics Field Exam January 2008

How Much Competition is a Secondary Market? Online Appendixes (Not for Publication)

Agent Based Trading Model of Heterogeneous and Changing Beliefs

NBER WORKING PAPER SERIES ON QUALITY BIAS AND INFLATION TARGETS. Stephanie Schmitt-Grohe Martin Uribe

Lecture 7: Bayesian approach to MAB - Gittins index

UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Asset prices, traders' behavior, and market design Anufriev, M.; Panchenko, V. Link to publication

Department of Mathematics. Mathematics of Financial Derivatives

Relume: A fractal analysis for the US stock market

Microeconomics of Banking: Lecture 2

Press Release - The Sveriges Riksbank (Bank of Sweden) Prize in Economics in Memory of Alfred Nobel

PROFITABILITY OF CONTRARIAN AND MOMENTUM STRATEGIES AND MARKET STABILITY

Economic policy. Monetary policy (part 2)

Agent-Based Simulation of N-Person Games with Crossing Payoff Functions

TOPICS IN MACROECONOMICS: MODELLING INFORMATION, LEARNING AND EXPECTATIONS. Private and public information

Term Structure of Credit Spreads of A Firm When Its Underlying Assets are Discontinuous

Notes on Estimating the Closed Form of the Hybrid New Phillips Curve

Transcription:

Technical Report: CES-497 A summary for the Brock and Hommes Heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos in a simple asset pricing model 1998 JEDC paper Michael Kampouridis, Shu-Heng Chen, Edward P.K. Tsang June 25, 2009 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to summarise the 1998 paper by William A. Brock and Cars H. Hommes, Heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos in a simple asset pricing model, in Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, 22, 1235-1274 (Brock and Hommes 1998). 1 Introduction In their paper, Brock and Hommes presented an asset pricing model with heterogeneous beliefs. The significance of the paper is that it presents numerical evidence of the existence of chaotic price fluctuations, when the intensity of choice among different trading strategies is high. The way this report is organised is as follows: section 2 presents the asset pricing model used in their paper, section 3 briefly presents the numerical tools used for their analysis, section 4 focusses on the dynamics of the equilibrium of asset prices with a small (two, three and four) number of trading strategies and finally, section 5 concludes this report. 2 The Model 2.1 Model description This paper presents a simple Present Discounted Value (PDV) asset pricing model with heterogeneous beliefs. The model has one risky and one risk-free University of Essex, UK National Cheng Chi University, Taiwan University of Essex, UK. 1

asset and each agent has to its disposal a finite set of strategies 1. At any time t, an agent can adopt a strategy h. This strategy h that an agent adopts reflects his beliefs 2 f h,t about the price x t of the risky asset at time t. All agent beliefs are of the form f h,t = g h x t 1 + b h (1) where g h is the trend and b h is the bias of trader type h. Details about these parameters are given below, in Section 2.3. These beliefs are updated based on the performance measure of accumulated past profits U h,t 1 of the previous period t 1: U h,t 1 = π h,t 1 + ηu h,t 2 (2) where π h,t is the past realized profits and η is the memory strength. Again, details about the parameter η will follow in Section 2.3. Profits π h,t 1 are equal to: π h,t 1 = 1 ασ 2 (x t Rx t 1 )(g h x t 2 + b h Rx t 1 ) (3) where α denotes the risk aversion and is assumed equal for all agents and σ 2 is the beliefs about the conditional variance of excess returns, and is also assumed to be a constant and equal for all types of traders. The equilibrium price is Rx t = Σn h,t 1 f h,t (4) where R is the excess return, and n h,t 1 is the fraction of agent type h at the beginning of period t, before the equilibrium price x t has been observed. The fractions of the strategies are equal to: where n h,t = exp[βu h,t 1 ]/Z t (5) Z t = Σexp[βU h,t 1 ] (6) Parameter β denotes the intensity agents can switch strategies and is called intensity of choice. Intensity of choice plays an important role at this model and is also described at the next section. 2.2 How the fractions change As we said earlier, n h,t 1 is the fraction of agent type h at the beginning of period t, before the equilibrium price x t has been observed. These old fractions are therefore used in the equilibrium equation (4) in order to calculate the new 1 In Brock and Hommes paper, each strategy represents a strategy type, such as fundamentalist, technical trader, rational and contrarian 2 A belief is also referred to as predictor in Brock and Hommes 2

equilibrium price x t. After this price has been revealed, it is used in equations (3) and (2) in order to to update the fractions n h,t of equation (5). This procedure is repeated for t number of times. Table 1 is given as a reference for this model s components, parameters and constants. Components, Parameters and Constants of the Brock-Hommes model Description Model Components Model Parameters Model Constants Strategy of an agent h Time t Price of the risky asset x t Agent belief f h,t Trend g h Bias b h Accumulated past profits U h,t Memory strength η Past realized profits π h,t Risk aversion α Beliefs about the conditional σ 2 variance of excess returns Gross return R Fraction of a strategy n Intensity of choice β Table 1: Components, Parameters and Constants of the Brock-Hommes asset pricing model 2.3 Parameters of the model In this subsection we present the main parameters that this model uses. 2.3.1 Trend g h and Bias b h Depending on the value of these two parameters, agents are characterised differently. In total, we can have five different cases: 1. If b h = 0 and (a) if g h > 0, then agent h is called a pure trend chaser (b) if g h < 0, then agent h is called a contrarian 2. If g h = 0 and (a) if b h > 0, then agent h is upward biased (b) if b h < 0, then agent h is downward biased 3. If g h = b h = 0, then agent h is a fundamentalist and thus believes that the prices will return to their fundamental value. 3

2.3.2 Memory strength η In most of the strategies, agents have no memory regarding their past profits, so η = 0. There is only one case that is examined where η > 0 and that is the case of traders with rational expectations/perfect foresight. 2.3.3 Intensity of choice β This is a very important parameter of the model. It measures how fast agents switch between different prediction strategies. When β traders use the strategy with the highest fitness. When β = 0, then traders distribute themselves evenly across the set of available strategies. The paper shows that an increase to the intensity of choice β to switch predictors can lead to market instability. When β is high, asset price fluctuations are characterized by an irregular switching between phases where prices are close to the EMH fundamental, phases of optimism, where traders become excitepd and extrapolate upwards trends, and phases of pessimism, where traders become nervous, causing a sharp decline in asset prices. 3 Numerical Analysis in nonlinear dynamics This section briefly presents the numerical tools Brock and Hommes use in order to detect the existence of chaos. In their paper, Brock and Hommes use the following tools: 1. Bifurcation diagrams 2. Phase diagrams 3. Lyapunov characteristic exponents (LCEs) 3.1 Bifurcation diagrams A bifurcation is a qualitative change in the dynamics, for instance concerning the existence or stability of a steady state or a cycle. Bifurcation diagrams therefore present the long-run behaviour of the model as a function of a parameter (in Brock and Hommes paper this parameter is the intensity of choice β). Observing a qualitative change in the dynamics of the model could be a possible route to chaos. 3.2 Phase diagrams In addition to bifurcation diagrams, Brock and Hommes plot phase diagrams for the price x t and the fractions n h,t. Their goal is to observe whether in the phase space strange attractors 3 can be observed. Existence of strange attractors is another indication of chaos. Figure 2 gives an example of a phase diagram. 3 An attracting set for a dynamical system is a closed subset A of its phase space, such that for many choices of initial point the system will evolve towards A. Attractor is therefore 4

Figure 1: An example of a Bifurcation diagram. This diagram presents how x changes when β increases. As we can observe, for high values of β, x does not take only one value. This is an indication of chaos. 3.3 Lyapunov characteristic exponents (LCEs) Bifurcation and phase diagrams are simple ways of getting information about the global dynamics. However, these diagrams provide just an idication for chaos and not a proof. A numerical analysis is therefore needed, in order to investigate whether indeed the model exhibits chaos. This is done by the numerical computation of the Lyapunov characteristic exponents (LCEs). LCEs measure the average rate of divergence (or convergence) of nearby to the equilibrium initial states, along an atrractor in several directions. When the largest LCE λ > 0, then this is numerical evidence for chaos. For a more detailed description of the above tools Brock and Hommes refer the readers to (Guckehneimer and Holmes 1983; Arrowsmith and Place 1994; Eckmann and Ruelle 1985; Brock 1986). To summarise this section, Brock and Hommes draw a conclusion whether chaos exists or not in the following way: first of all, with bifurcation and phase diagrams observe whether there are any indications for chaos. If there are indicaan attracting set which satisfies some supplementary condition, so that it cannot be split into smaller pieces. An attractor is called strange when it is a complicated set with a fractal structure. For further details on attractors and strange attractors the reader is referred to (Milnor 1985; Ruelle 2006) 5

Figure 2: An example of a Phase diagram for the four-type belief system from Brock and Hommes. The diagrams present evidence of the existence of strange attractors, as the intensity of choice β increases tions indeed, they then calculate the LCEs. If they also find that the maximum λ > 0, they then conclude that chaos exists. 4 Simple Belief Types Brock and Hommes examine their model under two, three and four belief types. Furthermore, especially for the case of two beliefs, they examine three different cases, with different types of traders. The following sections present the different belief types examined and their results, i.e. whereas the model exhibits chaos, under a certain type of agents. 4.1 Two Belief Types 4.1.1 Perfect foresight (rational agents) vs Trend chasers 1. Type 1 - Rational agents (g h = b h = 0 and memory strength η > 0) 2. Type 2 - Trend chasers with upward bias (g h = 0) Rational agents have perfect foresight. They know at each date all past prices and dividends, and the market equilibrium with all fractions n h,t for other belief types. Their belief equation is: 6

f 1,t = x t+1 The equilibrium equation (4) thus becomes: Rx t = Σn h,t 1 f h,t = n 1,t 1 x t+1 + n 2,t 1 gx t 1 Because of the assumtion of perfect foresight, it is not possible to do numerical analysis of the global dynamics. The reason for this is because the equilibrium equation has a forward looking element (x t+1 ). 4.1.2 Fundamentalists vs Trend chasers 1. Type 1 - Fundamentalists (g h = b h = 0) 2. Type 2 - Trend chasers (g h = 0) Results show that high intensity of choice leads to weakly 4 chaotic asset price fluctuations. Prices switch irregularly between close to the EMH fundamental prices and upward and downward trends. 4.1.3 Fundamentalists vs Contrarians 1. Type 1 - Fundamentalists (g h = b h = 0) 2. Type 2 - Contrarians (b h = 0, g h < 0) Prices are characterised by an irregular switching between a stable phase with prices close to their fundamental value and an unstable phase of up and down price oscillations of increasing amplitude. Once again, a high intensity of choice produces chaotic asset price dynamics with irregular fluctuations around the EMH fundamental. 4.2 Three Belief types 4.2.1 Fundamentalists vs Opposite biases 1. Type 1 - Fundamentalists (g h = b h = 0) 2. Type 2 - Trend chasers with upward bias (g h = 0, b h > 0) 3. Type 3 - Trend chasers with downward biases (g h = 0, b h < 0) As we can see, type 1 agents are fundamentalists, whereas types 2 and 3 are opposite biased traders. Type 2 traders are upward biased, whereas type 3 are downward biased, under the assumption that the biases are exactly opposite. Results show that only regular periodic fluctuations around the unstable fundamental steady state occur. Opposite biases can cause perpetual oscillations around the fundamental, but cannot lead to chaotic movements. 4 These chaotic price fluctuations are considered to be weak, because the largest LCE λ 1 is only slightly greater than 0 7

4.3 Four Belief types 4.3.1 Fundamentalists vs Trend chasers vs Bias The four types here are the following: 1. Type 1 - Fundamentalists (g h = b h = 0) 2. Type 2 - Trend chasers with upward bias (g h = 0, b h > 0) 3. Type 3 - Trend chasers with downward biases (g h = 0, b h < 0) 4. Type 4 - Strong, pure, trend chasers (b h = 0, g h > R) Results suggest again the existence of chaos, with switching between close to the EMH prices, oscillations around the fundamental and trends at irregular intervals. Table 2 summarises the results presented in this section. Summary Results Agent type Two-type: Perfect foresight vs Trend chasers Fundamentalists vs Trend chasers Fundamentalists vs Contrarians Three-type: Fundamentalists vs Opposite biases Four-type: Fundamentalists vs Trend vs Bias Exhibits chaos? NO YES YES NO YES Table 2: Summary results regarding the existence of chaos in the different belieftype models 5 Conclusion This report gave a brief summary of the 1998 Brock and Hommes paper regarding heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos, in a simple asset pricing model. In this report, we described the asset pricing model Brock and Hommes used, its parameters, the numerical tools they used for analysis and finally, we presented their results, which were conditions in which chaotic price fluctuations appear. According to their results, chaos was observed in 2 out of 3 two-belief types they examined (Fundamentalists vs Trend chasers and Fundamentalists vs Contrarians) and in the four belief type (Fundamentalists vs Trend vs Bias). Chaos was not observed in the Perfect foresight vs Trend chasers two type belief and in the Fundamentalists vs Opposite biases three type belief models. 8

References Arrowsmith D, Place C (1994) An Introduction to Dynamic Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge Brock W (1986) Distinguishing random and deterministic systems. abridged version. Journal of Economic Theory 40:168 195 Brock W, Hommes C (1998) Heterogeneous beliefs and routes to chaos in a simple asset pricing model. Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control 22:1235 1274 Eckmann JP, Ruelle D (1985) Ergodic theory of chaos and strange attractors. Reviews of Modern Physics 57:617 656 Guckehneimer J, Holmes P (1983) Nonlinear Oscillations, Dynamical Systems, and Bifurcations of Vector Fields. Springer, New York Milnor J (1985) On the concept of attractor. Communications of Mathematical Physics 99:177 195 Ruelle D (2006) What is a strange attractor? Notices of the American Mathematical Society 53(7):764 765 9