Industrial Engineering and Management Systems

Korean Institute of Industrial Engineers (대한산업공학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Portfolio Optimization with Groupwise Selection

  • Kim, Namhyoung (Department of Applied Statistics, Gachon University) ;
  • Sra, Suvrit (Max Planck Institute for Intelligent Systems)
  • Received : 2014.11.14
  • Accepted : 2014.11.25
  • Published : 2014.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Portfolio optimization in the presence of estimation error can be stabilized by incorporating norm-constraints; this result was shown by DeMiguel et al. (A generalized approach to portfolio optimization: improving performance by constraining portfolio norms, Management Science, 5, 798-812, 2009), who reported empirical performance better than numerous competing approaches. We extend the idea of norm-constraints by introducing a powerful enhancement, grouped selection for portfolio optimization. Here, instead of merely penalizing norms of the assets being selected, we penalize groups, where within a group assets are treated alike, but across groups, the penalization may differ. The idea of groupwise selection is grounded in statistics, but to our knowledge, it is novel in the context of portfolio optimization. Novelty aside, the real benefits of groupwise selection are substantiated by experiments; our results show that groupwise asset selection leads to strategies with lower variance, higher Sharpe ratios, and even higher expected returns than the ordinary norm-constrained formulations.

Keywords

References

  1. Bethge, M., Simoncelli, E. P., and Sinz, F. H. (2009), Hierarchical modeling of local image features through $L_p$-nested symmetric distributions, Proceedings of the 23rd Annual Conference on Neural Information Processing System (NIPS), Vancouver, Canada, 1696-1704.
  2. Campbell, J. Y., Lo, A. W., and MacKinlay, A. C. (1997), The Econometrics of Financial Markets, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  3. Cornuejols, G. and Tutuncu, R. (2007), Optimization Methods in Finance, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  4. DeMiguel, V., Garlappi, L., Nogales, F. J., and Uppal, R. (2009), A generalized approach to portfolio optimization: improving performance by constraining portfolio norms, Management Science, 55(5), 798-812. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0986
  5. Efron, B. and Gong, G. (1983), A leisurely look at the bootstrap, the jackknife, and cross-validation, The American Statistician, 37(1), 36-48.
  6. Jagannathan, R. and Ma, T. (2003), Risk reduction in large portfolios: why imposing the wrong constraints helps, The Journal of Finance, 58(4), 1651-1684. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-6261.00580
  7. Ledoit, O. and Wolf, M. (2003), Improved estimation of the covariance matrix of stock returns with an application to portfolio selection, Journal of Empirical Finance, 10(5), 603-621. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-5398(03)00007-0
  8. Ledoit, O. and Wolf, M. (2004), A well-conditioned estimator for large-dimensional covariance matrices, Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 88(2), 365-411. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0047-259X(03)00096-4
  9. Lintner, J. (1965), The valuation of risk assets and the selection of risky investments in stock portfolios and capital budgets, The Review of Economics and Statistics, 47(1), 13-37. https://doi.org/10.2307/1924119
  10. Maginn, J. L., Tuttle, D. L., McLeavey, D. W., and Pinto, J. E. (2007), Managing Investment Portfolios: A Dynamic Process (3rd ed.), Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
  11. Markowitz, H. (1951), Portfolio selection, Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77-91.
  12. Markowitz, H. (1991), Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments (2nd ed.), Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.