We routinely assume that investors are risk-averse return-seekers; i.e., they like returns and dislike risk. If so, why do we contend that only systematic risk is important? (Alternatively, why is total risk not important to investors, in and of itself?)

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Answer of We routinely assume that investors are risk-averse return-seekers; i.e., they like returns and dislike risk. If so, why do we contend that only systematic risk is important? (Alternatively, why is total risk not important to investors, in and of itself?)

We Routinely Assume That Investors Are Risk-Averse Return-Seekers; I