Are Gain and Loss Respectable?

9 Pages Posted: 22 May 2006

See all articles by Philip F. O'Connor

Philip F. O'Connor

University of Auckland - Department of Accounting and Finance; University of Waikato - Management School

Michael S. Rozeff

SUNY at Buffalo - Department of Financial & Managerial Economics

Abstract

This article presents a series of transparent arguments in favor of using gain and loss as return and risk concepts. Gain and loss are widely used in markets where returns are asymmetric, such as betting markets, bond markets, option markets, and insurance. When properly (and intuitively) defined with respect to risk-free rates, a number of remarkably simple and beautiful propositions follow: (1)The value of gain equals the value of loss. (2) An asset's risk premium equals its expected gain minus its expected loss. (3) An asset's beta coefficient equals its ratio of expected co-loss with the market to expected market loss, and also its expected co-gain with the market to expected market gain. (4) In CAPM, an asset's co-gain is directly proportional to its co-loss. Closed-form formulas show how a portfolio's gain-loss ratio rises with diversification. In this paper, the empirical benefits of diversification are demonstrated using stock return data.

Keywords: gain, loss, diversification, capm

JEL Classification: G11, G12

Suggested Citation

O'Connor, Philip F. and Rozeff, Michael S., Are Gain and Loss Respectable?. Journal of Portfolio Management, pp. 61-69, Summer 2002. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=903471

Philip F. O'Connor

University of Auckland - Department of Accounting and Finance ( email )

Private Bag 92019
Auckland 1001
New Zealand
+649-923-9431 (Phone)

University of Waikato - Management School ( email )

Hamilton
New Zealand
+64 7 838 4466 (Phone)

Michael S. Rozeff (Contact Author)

SUNY at Buffalo - Department of Financial & Managerial Economics ( email )

Buffalo, NY 14260
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
189
Abstract Views
956
rank
167,815
PlumX Metrics