Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2501.15557

Preventing Household Bankruptcy: The One-Third Rule in Financial Planning with Mathematical Validation and Game-Theoretic Insights

Aditi Godbole·Zubin Shah·Ranjeet S. Mudholkar
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

This paper analyzes the 1/3 Financial Rule, a method of allocating income equally among debt repayment, savings, and living expenses. Through mathematical modeling, game theory, behavioral finance, and technological analysis, we examine the rule's potential for supporting household financial stability and reducing bankruptcy risk. The research develops theoretical foundations using utility maximization theory, demonstrating how equal allocation emerges as a solution under standard economic assumptions. The game-theoretic analysis explores the rule's effectiveness across different household structures, revealing potential strategic advantages in financial decision-making. We investigate psychological factors influencing financial choices, including cognitive biases and neurobiological mechanisms that impact economic behavior. Technological approaches, such as AI-driven personalization, blockchain tracking, and smart contract applications, are examined for their potential to support financial planning. Empirical validation using U.S. Census data and longitudinal studies assesses the rule's performance across various household types. Stress testing under different economic conditions provides insights into its adaptability and resilience. The research integrates mathematical analysis with behavioral insights and technological perspectives to develop a comprehensive approach to household financial management.

Explore related subjects

q-fin.GN

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Aditi Godbole, Zubin Shah, Ranjeet S. Mudholkar. 2025-01-26. Preventing Household Bankruptcy: The One-Third Rule in Financial Planning with Mathematical Validation and Game-Theoretic Insights. https://doi.org/10.3390/jrfm18040185

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

The Virtue of Sparsity in Complexity

Sparsity or complexity? In modern high-dimensional asset pricing, these are often viewed as competing principles: recent empirical evidence favors richer models, while economic intuition has long favored parsimony. We reconcile this tension by distinguishing capacity sparsity-restrictions on effective model capacity-from factor sparsity-the parsimonious structure of priced risks. Revisiting the benchmark empirical design of Didisheim et al. (2025), we combine nonlinear feature expansions with basis pursuit, using column generation and GPU acceleration to scale estimation to 432 million candidate factors. Reaching this scale reveals a reversal in out-of-sample performance: sparse portfolios trail dense ridgeless benchmarks at lower complexity but achieve a higher Sharpe ratio and lower pricing error at the largest candidate set. Capacity expansion and factor sparsity are therefore complements: enlarging the candidate space allows a parsimonious pricing kernel to outperform its dense counterpart.

q-fin.GN↗
arXiv2026

Prediction Markets Beat the Weather Forecast on Tomorrow's High Temperature

The sooner we receive information, and the more accurate it is, the better planning decisions we can make. Every day, prediction markets let anyone bet on tomorrow's high temperature in cities around the world, creating a market-implied forecast built on dispersed information. We use the past five years of market data from the Kalshi exchange for seven American cities to extract, hour by hour, the market-implied forecast. We use this forecast as a measuring instrument to see how much information about the temperature the market makes public before the public forecasting system does. We race it against the leading American and European weather forecasts. In six of the seven cities we study, the market beats the most accurate single public forecast, the National Blend of Models (NBM). Aggregating every city-day, at the end of the market's first hour of trading it beats the best single public product by about 10 percent in root-mean-square error, and holds its lead through the day, overnight, and into the target day. Looking at how the forecasts move over time, we find the National Blend travels four times further toward the market between its postings than the market travels toward the NBM. The market does not react to new weather forecast updates; instead, the forecast slowly publishes information that the market had already shared publicly.

q-fin.GN↗
arXiv2026

Firm Valuation When AI Shapes the Business Model: A Milestone-Based Real-Options Framework for the AI Valuation Uncertainty Problem

Standard valuation methods, including discounted cash flow, the income approach standard IDW S 1 of the Institute of Public Auditors in Germany, and market multiples, compress milestone probabilities, continuation options, and risk shifts into opaque aggregate parameters; none provides a structured protocol for decomposing AI integration into auditable option-level assumptions. We propose an industry-agnostic taxonomy separating AI Integrators from AI Providers. AI Integrators are further classified by their Integration Depth Level, ranging from no integration to AI at the core of the product or process. A milestone-gated real-options overlay decomposes milestone state value into five components, and an Analytic Hierarchy Process-based Success Readiness Index derives per-option probabilities from structured pairwise comparisons for scenario analysis. Applied to an AI-native energy software-as-a-service firm, the framework yields a coherent valuation band traceable to identifiable option-level assumptions. Risk concentrates in later-stage continuation options, matching the structural prediction for AI Providers. The protocol applies across the firm lifecycle, including mergers and acquisitions due diligence. The case is a single-firm demonstration of protocol coherence, not empirical validation; multi-case testing against realised post-exit valuations is left to future research.

q-fin.GN↗