Cacarulo: Composition-dependent indices for Insurance

[Cacarulo]

> Actually, this is somewhat important to
> point out, although it must be obvious:
> these are all risk-averse indices, as well
> as composition-dependent indices. When
> Griffin or Wong give us different indices
> (indeed, different basic strategy) for
> various two-card holdings, all of that work
> is purely ev-maximizing. Clearly, this is a
> different concept.

No, my indices are all ev-maximizing. I haven't found any RA-index better than the ev-maximizing indices. Maybe I am wrong in my assumptions.
I know MathProf is working on that so we'll have to wait for his paper.

Sincerely,
Cacarulo

[Don Schlesinger]

> No, my indices are all ev-maximizing. I
> haven't found any RA-index better than the
> ev-maximizing indices. Maybe I am wrong in
> my assumptions.

OK. This is a tricky concept. But, I suppose they can be both.

Don