×

Optimal portfolios under worst-case scenarios. (English) Zbl 1308.91136

Summary: In standard portfolio theories such as mean-variance optimization, expected utility theory, rank dependent utility heory, Yaari’s dual theory and cumulative prospect theory, the worst outcomes for optimal strategies occur when the market declines (e.g. during crises), which is at odds with the needs of many investors. Hence, we depart from the traditional settings and study optimal strategies for investors who impose additional constraints on their final wealth in the states corresponding to a stressed financial market. We provide a framework that maintains the stylized features of the SP/A theory while dealing with the goal of security in a more flexible way. Preferences become state-dependent, and we assess the impact of these preferences on trading decisions. We construct optimal strategies explicitly and show how they outperform traditional diversified strategies under worst-case scenarios.

MSC:

91G10 Portfolio theory
60H30 Applications of stochastic analysis (to PDEs, etc.)
62P05 Applications of statistics to actuarial sciences and financial mathematics
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] DOI: 10.1016/j.jfs.2009.02.001 · doi:10.1016/j.jfs.2009.02.001
[2] DOI: 10.2307/1907921 · Zbl 0050.36801 · doi:10.2307/1907921
[3] DOI: 10.1016/j.jmateco.2011.09.005 · Zbl 1231.91424 · doi:10.1016/j.jmateco.2011.09.005
[4] DOI: 10.1080/10920277.2011.10597610 · Zbl 1213.91135 · doi:10.1080/10920277.2011.10597610
[5] DOI: 10.1239/jap/1346955339 · Zbl 1259.60022 · doi:10.1239/jap/1346955339
[6] Carlier G, Math. Finance 21 (2) pp 169– (2011)
[7] DOI: 10.1080/15326340600878016 · Zbl 1159.91403 · doi:10.1080/15326340600878016
[8] DOI: 10.1093/rfs/1.1.67 · doi:10.1093/rfs/1.1.67
[9] DOI: 10.1086/256692 · doi:10.1086/256692
[10] DOI: 10.1086/589562 · doi:10.1086/589562
[11] DOI: 10.1016/j.jfineco.2010.08.015 · doi:10.1016/j.jfineco.2010.08.015
[12] DOI: 10.2307/1914185 · Zbl 0411.90012 · doi:10.2307/1914185
[13] DOI: 10.1111/j.1540-6261.2009.01483.x · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.2009.01483.x
[14] DOI: 10.1016/0304-405X(90)90012-O · doi:10.1016/0304-405X(90)90012-O
[15] DOI: 10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60416-5 · doi:10.1016/S0065-2601(08)60416-5
[16] DOI: 10.1006/jmps.1999.1259 · Zbl 0946.91024 · doi:10.1006/jmps.1999.1259
[17] Polkovnichenko V, Household Portfolio Diversification: A Case for Rank-Dependent Preferences 18 (4) pp 1467– (2005)
[18] Rieger MO, Econ. Lett. 108 (1) pp 327– (2010) · Zbl 1196.91022 · doi:10.1016/j.econlet.2010.05.021
[19] DOI: 10.1007/s00780-009-0117-9 · Zbl 1303.91160 · doi:10.1007/s00780-009-0117-9
[20] DOI: 10.2307/2676187 · doi:10.2307/2676187
[21] DOI: 10.1239/jap/1308662634 · Zbl 1219.60016 · doi:10.1239/jap/1308662634
[22] DOI: 10.1007/BF00122574 · Zbl 0775.90106 · doi:10.1007/BF00122574
[23] DOI: 10.1080/13504860802639360 · Zbl 1179.91085 · doi:10.1080/13504860802639360
[24] Wagner W, Diversification Financ. Institut. Systemic Crises 19 (3) pp 373– (2009)
[25] DOI: 10.2307/1911158 · Zbl 0616.90005 · doi:10.2307/1911158
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.