Some experiments on solving multistage stochastic mixed 0-1 programs with time stochastic dominance constraints

In this work we extend to the multistage case two recent risk averse measures for two-stage stochastic programs based on first- and second-order stochastic dominance constraints induced by mixed-integer linear recourse. Additionally, we consider Time Stochastic Dominance (TSD) along a given horizon. Given the dimensions of medium-sized problems augmented by the new variables and constraints required by those risk measures, it is unrealistic to solve the problem up to optimality by plain use of MIP solvers in a reasonable computing time, at least. Instead of it, decomposition algorithms of some type should be used. We present an extension of our Branch-and-Fix Coordination algorithm, so named BFC-TSD, where a special treatment is given to cross scenario group constraints that link variables from different scenario groups. A broad computational experience is presented by comparing the risk neutral approach and the tested risk averse strategies. The performance of the new version of the BFC algorithm versus the plain use of a state-of-the-artMIP solver is also reported.

A Note on Risk Acceptance, Bankruptcy Avoidance and Riskiness Measures

In this work we clarify the relationships between riskiness, risk acceptance and bankruptcy avoidance. We distinguish between the restriction on the current wealth required to make a gamble acceptable to the decision maker and the restriction on the current wealth required to guarantee no bankruptcy if a gamble is accepted. We focus on the measure of riskiness proposed by Foster and Hart.

Asset pricing and systematic liquidity risk: an empirical investigation of the Spanish stock market

Systematic liquidity shocks should affect the optimal behavior of agents in financial markets. Indeed, fluctuations in various measures of liquidity are significantly correlated across common stocks. Accordingly, this paper empirically analyzes whether Spanish average returns vary cross-sectionally with betas estimated relative to two competing liquidity risk factors. The first one, proposed by Pastor and Stambaugh (2002), is associated with the strength of volume-related return reversals. Our marketwide liquidity factor is defined as the difference between returns highly sensitive to changes in the relative bid-ask spread and returns with low sensitivities to those changes. Our empirical results show that neither of these proxies for systematic liquidity risk seems to be priced in the Spanish stock market. Further international evidence is deserved.

Flood risk management: What are the main drivers of prevention?

4 p.

Risk management for mathematical optimization under uncertainty

We present a general multistage stochastic mixed 0-1 problem where the uncertainty appears everywhere in the objective function, constraints matrix and right-hand-side. The uncertainty is represented by a scenario tree that can be a symmetric or a nonsymmetric one. The stochastic model is converted in a mixed 0-1 Deterministic Equivalent Model in compact representation. Due to the difficulty of the problem, the solution offered by the stochastic model has been traditionally obtained by optimizing the objective function expected value (i.e., mean) over the scenarios, usually, along a time horizon. This approach (so named risk neutral) has the inconvenience of providing a solution that ignores the variance of the objective value of the scenarios and, so, the occurrence of scenarios with an objective value below the expected one. Alternatively, we present several approaches for risk averse management, namely, a scenario immunization strategy, the optimization of the well known Value-at-Risk (VaR) and several variants of the Conditional Value-at-Risk strategies, the optimization of the expected mean minus the weighted probability of having a "bad" scenario to occur for the given solution provided by the model, the optimization of the objective function expected value subject to stochastic dominance constraints (SDC) for a set of profiles given by the pairs of threshold objective values and either bounds on the probability of not reaching the thresholds or the expected shortfall over them, and the optimization of a mixture of the VaR and SDC strategies.