Idea: Rank without a utility
Stochastic dominance compares whole distributions and ranks them for a whole family of utilities at once.
- First order: everyone who prefers more agrees
- Second order: every risk-averse holder agrees
- Both fail: the ranking depends on the utility
Formula: First-order dominance
At every threshold, X is no more likely than Y to end at or below it.
Example: Desks with the same payoffs
pays , , with chances , , ; with , , . Does dominate? Gap in means?
- Cumulative at and : has , ; has ,
- sits below everywhere, so dominates
- Area between curves:
Common mistake: Dominance is not winning every time
Reading as "X beats Y in every scenario". The definition looks only at the distributions.
Instead On one coin pays or and pays or : wins on heads, yet dominates.
Idea: A higher mean proves nothing
pays for sure; pays or with equal chances, mean .
- The curves cross, so neither dominates
- With you choose
- With you choose : beats
Formula: Second-order dominance
If X never has a larger expected shortfall at any target t, every risk-averse holder prefers X.
Example: Same mean, more noise
pays or , pays or , each with equal chances. Expected shortfall below ?
- :
- is never worse at any target: it dominates
- :
Formula: Jensen for a concave u
A risk-averse holder values a gamble below its mean; the gap is the risk premium.
Quick check: Price of the risk
With , a bet pays with chance , else . What is the risk premium?
Show the answer
Answer:
Utility , so ; mean .
Idea: Say it in order
Compare cumulative chances first: if one curve never rises above the other, no utility is needed.
- Curves cross: compare means, then shortfalls
- Both fail: the ranking depends on the utility
- Then show the answer for a named one
Courses / Problem-solving toolkit