Posted Content•
Risk Reduction in Large Portfolios: Why Imposing the Wrong Constraints Helps
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors show that constraining portfolio weights to be nonnegative is equivalent to using the sample covariance matrix after reducing its large elements and then form the optimal portfolio without any restrictions on portfolio weights.
Abstract: Mean-variance efficient portfolios constructed using sample moments often involve taking extreme long and short positions. Hence practitioners often impose portfolio weight constraints when constructing efficient portfolios. Green and Hollifield (1992) argue that the presence of a single dominant factor in the covariance matrix of returns is why we observe extreme positive and negative weights. If this were the case then imposing the weight constraint should hurt whereas the empirical evidence is often to the contrary. We reconcile this apparent contradiction. We show that constraining portfolio weights to be nonnegative is equivalent to using the sample covariance matrix after reducing its large elements and then form the optimal portfolio without any restrictions on portfolio weights. This shrinkage helps reduce the risk in estimated optimal portfolios even when they have negative weights in the population. Surprisingly, we also find that once the nonnegativity constraint is imposed, minimum variance portfolios constructed using the monthly sample covariance matrix perform as well as those constructed using covariance matrices estimated using factor models, shrinkage estimators, and daily data. When minimizing tracking error is the criterion, using daily data instead of monthly data helps. However, the sample covariance matrix without any correction for microstructure effects performs the best.
Citations
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors evaluate the out-of-sample performance of the sample-based mean-variance model, and its extensions designed to reduce estimation error, relative to the naive 1-N portfolio.
Abstract: We evaluate the out-of-sample performance of the sample-based mean-variance model, and its extensions designed to reduce estimation error, relative to the naive 1-N portfolio. Of the 14 models we evaluate across seven empirical datasets, none is consistently better than the 1-N rule in terms of Sharpe ratio, certainty-equivalent return, or turnover, which indicates that, out of sample, the gain from optimal diversification is more than offset by estimation error. Based on parameters calibrated to the US equity market, our analytical results and simulations show that the estimation window needed for the sample-based mean-variance strategy and its extensions to outperform the 1-N benchmark is around 3000 months for a portfolio with 25 assets and about 6000 months for a portfolio with 50 assets. This suggests that there are still many "miles to go" before the gains promised by optimal portfolio choice can actually be realized out of sample. The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Society for Financial Studies. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org, Oxford University Press.
2,809 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors explain why constraining portfolio weights to be nonnegative can reduce the risk in estimated optimal portfolios even when the constraints are wrong, and they reconcile this apparent contradiction.
Abstract: Green and Hollifield (1992) argue that the presence of a dominant factor would result in extreme negative weights in mean-variance efficient portfolios even in the absence of estimation errors. In that case, imposing no-short-sale constraints should hurt, whereas empirical evidence is often to the contrary. We reconcile this apparent contradiction. We explain why constraining portfolio weights to be nonnegative can reduce the risk in estimated optimal portfolios even when the constraints are wrong. Surprisingly, with no-short-sale constraints in place, the sample covariance matrix performs as well as covariance matrix estimates based on factor models, shrinkage estimators, and daily data. MARKOWITZ'S (1952, 1959) PORTFOLIO THEORY is one of the most important theoretical developments in finance. Mean-variance efficient portfolios play an important role in this theory. Such portfolios constructed using sample moments often involve large negative weights in a number of assets. Since negative portfolio weights (short positions) are difficult to implement in practice, most investors impose the constraint that portfolio weights should be nonnegative when constructing mean-variance efficient portfolios. Green and Hollifield (1992) argue that because a single factor dominates the covariance structure, it would be difficult to dismiss the observed extreme negative and positive weights as being entirely due to the imprecise estimation of the inputs. They consider the global minimum variance portfolio to avoid the effect of estimation error in the mean on portfolio weights. They note that when returns are generated by a single factor model, minimum variance portfolios can be constructed in two steps. First, naively diversify over the set of high beta stocks and
1,111 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a general framework for finding portfolios that perform well out-of-sample in the presence of estimation error is proposed, which relies on solving the traditional minimum-variance problem but subject to the additional constraint that the norm of the portfolio-weight vector be smaller than a given threshold.
Abstract: We provide a general framework for finding portfolios that perform well out-of-sample in the presence of estimation error. This framework relies on solving the traditional minimum-variance problem but subject to the additional constraint that the norm of the portfolio-weight vector be smaller than a given threshold. We show that our framework nests as special cases the shrinkage approaches of Jagannathan and Ma (Jagannathan, R., T. Ma. 2003. Risk reduction in large portfolios: Why imposing the wrong constraints helps. J. Finance58 1651--1684) and Ledoit and Wolf (Ledoit, O., M. Wolf. 2003. Improved estimation of the covariance matrix of stock returns with an application to portfolio selection. J. Empirical Finance10 603--621, and Ledoit, O., M. Wolf. 2004. A well-conditioned estimator for large-dimensional covariance matrices. J. Multivariate Anal.88 365--411) and the 1/N portfolio studied in DeMiguel et al. (DeMiguel, V., L. Garlappi, R. Uppal. 2009. Optimal versus naive diversification: How inefficient is the 1/N portfolio strategy? Rev. Financial Stud.22 1915--1953). We also use our framework to propose several new portfolio strategies. For the proposed portfolios, we provide a moment-shrinkage interpretation and a Bayesian interpretation where the investor has a prior belief on portfolio weights rather than on moments of asset returns. Finally, we compare empirically the out-of-sample performance of the new portfolios we propose to 10 strategies in the literature across five data sets. We find that the norm-constrained portfolios often have a higher Sharpe ratio than the portfolio strategies in Jagannathan and Ma (2003), Ledoit and Wolf (2003, 2004), the 1/N portfolio, and other strategies in the literature, such as factor portfolios.
913 citations
01 Jan 2006
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyze theoretically the factors that determine the advantages from combining forecasts (for example, the degree of correlation between forecast errors and the relative size of the individual models' forecast error variances), and discuss several possibilities related to model misspecification, instability, and estimation error in situations where the number of models is large relative to the available sample size.
Abstract: Forecast combinations have frequently been found in empirical studies to produce better forecasts on average than methods based on the ex ante best individual forecasting model. Moreover, simple combinations that ignore correlations between forecast errors often dominate more refined combination schemes aimed at estimating the theoretically optimal combination weights. In this chapter we analyze theoretically the factors that determine the advantages from combining forecasts (for example, the degree of correlation between forecast errors and the relative size of the individual models' forecast error variances). Although the reasons for the success of simple combination schemes are poorly understood, we discuss several possibilities related to model misspecification, instability (non-stationarities) and estimation error in situations where the number of models is large relative to the available sample size. We discuss the role of combinations under asymmetric loss and consider combinations of point, interval and probability forecasts.
822 citations
TL;DR: This work proposes to add to the objective function a penalty proportional to the sum of the absolute values of the portfolio weights, which regularizes (stabilizes) the optimization problem, encourages sparse portfolios, and allows accounting for transaction costs.
Abstract: We consider the problem of portfolio selection within the classical Markowitz mean-variance framework, reformulated as a constrained least-squares regression problem. We propose to add to the objective function a penalty proportional to the sum of the absolute values of the portfolio weights. This penalty regularizes (stabilizes) the optimization problem, encourages sparse portfolios (i.e., portfolios with only few active positions), and allows accounting for transaction costs. Our approach recovers as special cases the no-short-positions portfolios, but does allow for short positions in limited number. We implement this methodology on two benchmark data sets constructed by Fama and French. Using only a modest amount of training data, we construct portfolios whose out-of-sample performance, as measured by Sharpe ratio, is consistently and significantly better than that of the naive evenly weighted portfolio.
532 citations
References
More filters
TL;DR: In this article, the authors identify five common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds, including three stock-market factors: an overall market factor and factors related to firm size and book-to-market equity.
24,874 citations
TL;DR: In this article, a simple method of calculating a heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix that is positive semi-definite by construction is described.
Abstract: This paper describes a simple method of calculating a heteroskedasticity and autocorrelation consistent covariance matrix that is positive semi-definite by construction. It also establishes consistency of the estimated covariance matrix under fairly general conditions.
18,117 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the authors defined asset classes technology sector stocks will diminish as the construction of the portfolio, and the construction diversification among the, same level of assets, which is right for instance among the assets.
Abstract: So it is equal to the group of portfolio will be sure. See dealing with the standard deviations. See dealing with terminal wealth investment universe. Investors are rational and return at the point. Technology fund and standard deviation of investments you. Your holding periods of time and as diversification depends. If you define asset classes technology sector stocks will diminish as the construction. I know i've left the effect. If the research studies on large cap. One or securities of risk minimize more transaction. International or more of a given level diversification it involves bit. This is used the magnitude of how to reduce stress and do change over. At an investment goals if you adjust for some cases the group. The construction diversification among the, same level. Over diversification portfolio those factors include risk. It is right for instance among the assets which implies.
6,323 citations
TL;DR: In this article, the observed market model and associated ordinary least squares estimators are developed in detail, and computationally convenient, consistent estimators for parameters of the market model are calculated and then applied to daily returns of securities listed in the NYSE and ASE.
2,859 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors present a method for measuring beta when share price data suffer from this problem, using a one-in-three random sample of all U.K. Stock Exchange shares from 1955 to 1974.
2,690 citations