Tests for the existence and the sign of the volatility risk premium are often based on expected option hedging errors. When the hedge is performed under the ideal conditions of continuous trading and correct model specification, the sign of the premium is the same as the sign of the mean hedging error for a large class of models. We show that discrete trading and model misspecification may cause the standard test to yield unreliable results. In particular, ignoring jump risk premia can lead to incorrect conclusions. We also show that delta-gamma hedges do not increase the reliability of the test.

We consider an asset allocation problem in a continuous-time model with stochastic volatility and jumps in both the asset price and its volatility. First, we derive the optimal portfolio for an investor with constant relative risk aversion. The demand for jump risk includes a hedging component, which is not present in models without volatility jumps. We further show that the introduction of derivative contracts can have substantial economic value. We also analyze the distribution of terminal wealth for an investor who uses the wrong model, either by ignoring volatility jumps or by falsely including such jumps, or who is subject to estimation risk. Whenever a model different from the true one is used, the terminal wealth distribution exhibits fatter tails and (in some cases) significant default risk.