Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Outline
Literature and Introduction
Dual Realizations of Mean-Variance Pair
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
Conclusions
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
1 / 33
Outline
Literature and Introduction
Dual Realizations of Mean-Variance Pair
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
Conclusions
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
1 / 33
Outline
Literature and Introduction
Dual Realizations of Mean-Variance Pair
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
Conclusions
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
1 / 33
Outline
Literature and Introduction
Dual Realizations of Mean-Variance Pair
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
Conclusions
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
1 / 33
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
2 / 33
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
2 / 33
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
2 / 33
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
2 / 33
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
2 / 33
min
x
s.t.
1 !
x Vx
2
x ! e = ,
x ! 1 = x0 ,
(1)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
3 / 33
(2)
where
A = 1! V 1 e = e ! V 1 1,
B = e ! V 1 e > 0,
C = 1! V 1 1 > 0,
D = BC A2 > 0.
The positiveness of D can be seen from the positiveness of
(Ae B1)! V 1 (Ae B1) = BD (Merton(1972)).
A fact that has not been fully recognized in the literature is that
parameter A can be positive, negative or zero. .. ... ... . .. ... ... ... . .. ... ... ... . .. ... ... ... . ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
4 / 33
!
"2
A
x2
x0 + 0 .
C
C
(3)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
5 / 33
X ie
A
x0 },
C
A
{x(x0 ; ) | x(x0 ; ) is given in (2), < x0 }.
C
{x(x0 ; ) | x(x0 ; ) is given in (2),
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
6 / 33
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
7 / 33
Reachable Region
The reachable region in the mean-variance space is defined as
{(, ) | | | B}.
!
. . .
.. .. ..
8 / 33
Reachable Region
The reachable region in the mean-variance space is defined as
{(, ) | | | B}.
!
. . .
.. .. ..
8 / 33
Reachable Region
The reachable region in the mean-variance space is defined as
{(, ) | | | B}.
!
. . .
.. .. ..
8 / 33
Reachable Region
The reachable region in the mean-variance space is defined as
{(, ) | | | B}.
!
. . .
.. .. ..
8 / 33
Part A
Part B
Part C
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
9 / 33
|A|
}
C
} represents
with positive expected returns and {(, ) | = |A|
C
all minimum variance points with negative expected returns.
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
10 / 33
Part A:
Part B:
Part C:
|A|
{(, ) | < B}.
C
Every point in Part A is achieved by two efficient boundary portfolio
policies corresponding to two different initial wealth levels.
|A|
|A|
{(, ) | < },
C
C
Any point in Part B is achieved by one efficient boundary portfolio
policy and one inefficient boundary portfolio policy corresponding to
two different initial wealth levels. When A = 0, part B vanishes.
|A|
{(, ) | B < < }.
C
Every point in Part C is achieved by two inefficient
boundary
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
portfolio policies.
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
11 / 33
Part A:
Part B:
Part C:
|A|
{(, ) | < B}.
C
Every point in Part A is achieved by two efficient boundary portfolio
policies corresponding to two different initial wealth levels.
|A|
|A|
{(, ) | < },
C
C
Any point in Part B is achieved by one efficient boundary portfolio
policy and one inefficient boundary portfolio policy corresponding to
two different initial wealth levels. When A = 0, part B vanishes.
|A|
{(, ) | B < < }.
C
Every point in Part C is achieved by two inefficient
boundary
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
portfolio policies.
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
11 / 33
Part A:
Part B:
Part C:
|A|
{(, ) | < B}.
C
Every point in Part A is achieved by two efficient boundary portfolio
policies corresponding to two different initial wealth levels.
|A|
|A|
{(, ) | < },
C
C
Any point in Part B is achieved by one efficient boundary portfolio
policy and one inefficient boundary portfolio policy corresponding to
two different initial wealth levels. When A = 0, part B vanishes.
|A|
{(, ) | B < < }.
C
Every point in Part C is achieved by two inefficient
boundary
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
portfolio policies.
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
11 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Outline
Literature and Introduction
Dual Realizations of Mean-Variance Pair
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
Conclusions
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
12 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Definition
!
"2
!
"2
A
x02
C
A
x2
x0 + ]) % (
, [
x0 + 0 ]),
C
C
D
C
C
(6)
(7)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
13 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
2A
B
(8)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
14 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Remark
Set { |
A
C x0
B
A x0 }
2
is non-empty as D = BC
. .
. .A
. . .>
. .0.
. .
.. ..
..
. . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
15 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Markowitzs Example
For this market of three risky assets with expected return vector
e = (1.162, 1.246, 1.228)!
and covariance,
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
16 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
From (8) and Proposition 3.2, it can be verified that the following
boundary policy associated with a less initial wealth x0 = 0.9985,
x(
x0 = 0.9985, = 1.16) = (0.9914, 0.0404, 0.0475)!
yields the same mean-variance pair of (1.160, 0.0719).
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
17 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
min
x
s.t.
1 !
x Vx
2
x ! e = ,
x ! 1 x0 ,
(9)
where the initial wealth level, x0 , and the pre-set expected wealth level,
, are both assumed to be positive.
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
18 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
x0
(10)
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
19 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
20 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
20 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
20 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
MVP
..
. . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
21 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
Outline
Literature and Introduction
Dual Realizations of Mean-Variance Pair
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 1 and Best Investment Performance
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
Conclusions
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
22 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
max
x
s.t.
x ! e + (x0 x ! 1)
1 !
x Vx = 2 ,
2
x ! 1 x0 ,
(14)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
23 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
2
1
1
x (
x0 ; ) = (BV 1AV e)+
2 +
x0 (CV 1 eAV 1 1),
D
CD
C D
CD
(15)
where
$
x0 ,
if A > C and 2 > BA x0 ,
%
x0 =
(16)
C
(A C ) D+(AC )2 , otherwise.
Furthermore, the mean-variance efficient frontier of (MV2 ) can be expressed as,
%
)2 2
D 2
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
24 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
MVP
x0
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
25 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
x0
x0
MVP
MVP
(b) A < 0
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
26 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
27 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
28 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
Markowitzs Example
Applying the two revised mean variance formulations, (MV1 ) and (MV2 ),
to the Markowitzs example yields the efficient frontier of (MV1 ) as
,
0.0554 2 0.0079 + 1.1540, > 1.1609,
=
3.0589,
0 1.1609,
and the efficient frontier of (MV2 ) as
,
0.0554 2 0.0079 + 1.1540,
=
1 + 0.4702,
> 1.2055,
0 1.2055.
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
29 / 33
Pseudo Efficiency
Type 2 and Optimal Management of Initial Endowment
1.22
1.21
1.2
1.19
1.18
1.17
1.16
MVP
1.15
1.14
1.13
0.26
0.28
0.3
0.32
0.34
0.36
0.38
0.4
0.42
0.44
0.46
..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
..
. . .
.. .. ..
30 / 33
Conclusions
Conclusion
!
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
31 / 33
Conclusions
.
.. ..
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.
..
. . .
.. .. ..
32 / 33