Area under the receiving operator characteristic curve (AUC) is commonly reported alongside binary prediction models. However, there are concerns that AUC might be a misleading measure of prediction performance in the rare event setting. This setting is common since many events of clinical importance are rare events. We conducted a simulation study to determine when or whether AUC is unstable in the rare event setting. Specifically, we aimed to determine whether the bias and variance of AUC are driven by the number of events or the event rate. We also investigated the behavior of other commonly used measures of prediction performance, including positive predictive value, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. Our results indicate that poor AUC behavior -- as measured by empirical bias, variability of cross-validated AUC estimates, and empirical coverage of confidence intervals -- is driven by the minimum class size, not event rate. Performance of sensitivity is driven by the number of events, while that of specificity is driven by the number of non-events. Other measures, including positive predictive value and accuracy, depend on the event rate even in large samples. AUC is reliable in the rare event setting provided that the total number of events is moderately large.