Abstract
This paper studies finite-horizon consumption-portfolio decisions with recursive utility. We show that the parameter seemingly representing the individual’s bequest preference in traditional recursive utility formulations is quantitatively and qualitatively misleading. The parameter value is uninformative about the optimal bequest which, in some cases, is even inversely related to the magnitude of the apparent bequest weight. We argue that the ratio between optimal bequest and the optimal consumption rate just before the terminal date is a much better representation of the strength of the bequest motive. Numerical examples illustrate the pitfalls using the traditional specification and clarifies how the bequest preference affects optimal decisions and the life-cycle patterns of consumption and wealth assuming constant investment opportunities or stochastic interest rates. We show that the typical utility representation for a unit elasticity of intertemporal substitution actually assumes a strong bequest preference.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Article number | 106428 |
Journal | Journal of Banking & Finance |
Volume | 138 |
Number of pages | 15 |
ISSN | 0378-4266 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - May 2022 |
Bibliographical note
Published online: 3 February 2022.Keywords
- Consumption-portfolio choice
- Life-cycle decisions
- Terminal condition
- Weight on bequest
- Epstein-Zin utility