The financial crisis impact on the composition of an optimal portfolio in the stock market: study applied to portuguese index PSI 20

In order to maximize their utility function, investors select some assets over others, choosing the portfolio that will allow them to maximize their wealth. Each asset is chosen considering the relationship between the risk of that particular investment (usually measured by variance) - and the profitability it can offer, as well as the risk between this and other assets (measured by covariance). The purpose of this study consisted of constructing the minimum variance portfolio, using data from the PSI-20 (2008-2016) representative asset quotation, where investors are risk reluctant and wish to minimize risk while maintaining the same level of profitability, or on the other hand, maintaining the same level of risk but maximizing expected profit. In order to do this, a comparison of the optimal portfolio in 2004-2017 was carried out, compared to the minimum variance portfolio after the financial crisis (2008-2016). The method used to estimate each asset’s expected profitability that makes up the PSI-20 consists of extracting the obtained historical quotations. The optimal portfolio composition, in the period after the financial crisis, shows that the energy sector has an optimal portfolio weight reduction of 39.15%, that the big distribution sector (23.85%) was introduced into the portfolio and by last, the industrial sector stands its ground in the composition of the optimal portfolio.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

The Financial Crisis Impact on the Composition of an Optimal Portfolio in the Stock Market - Study Applied to Portuguese Index PSI 20

In order to maximize their utility function, investors select some assets over others, choosing the portfolio that will allow them to maximize their wealth. Each asset is chosen considering the relationship between the risk of that particular investment (usually measured by variance) - and the profitability it can offer, as well as the risk between this and other assets (measured by covariance). The purpose of this study consisted of constructing the minimum variance portfolio, using data from the PSI-20 (2008-2016) representative asset quotation, where investors are risk reluctant and wish to minimize risk while maintaining the same level of profitability, or on the other hand, maintaining the same level of risk but maximizing expected profit. In order to do this, a comparison of the optimal portfolio in 2004-2017 was carried out, compared to the minimum variance portfolio after the financial crisis (2008-2016). The method used to estimate each asset’s expected profitability that makes up the PSI-20 consists of extracting the obtained historical quotations. The optimal portfolio composition, in the period after the financial crisis, shows that the energy sector has an optimal portfolio weight reduction of 39.15%, that the big distribution sector (23.85%) was introduced into the portfolio and by last, the industrial sector stands its ground in the composition of the optimal portfolio.info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersio

Map-reduced based approach for mining group stock portfolio

[[abstract]]In this paper, the map-reduce technique is utilized for speeding up the mining process and derived as similar results as our previous approach. The chromosome representation consists of four parts that are a mapper number, grouping part, stock part and portfolio part. According to mapper number, chromosomes in population are divided into subsets and sent to respective mappers. Fitness evaluation and genetic operations are the same with our previous approach, and executed on reducers. The evolution process is repeated until reaching the terminal conditions. Experiments are conducted on a real dataset to show the performance of proposed approach.[[notice]]補正完

Multi-layer Decision methodology For ranking Z-numbers

The new concept of a – number has been recently introduced in decision making analysis. This concept is capable of effectively dealing with uncertainty in information about a decision. As this concept is relatively new in fuzzy sets, its underlying theoretical aspects have not been established yet. In this paper, a multi-layer methodology for ranking Z – numbers is proposed for the first time. This methodology consists of two layers: Z – number conversion as the first layer and fuzzy number ranking as the second layer. In this study, the conversion methodology of Z – numbers into fuzzy numbers is extended to conversion into standardised generalised fuzzy number so that the methodology is applicable to both positive and negative data values. The methodology is validated by means of thorough comparison with some established ranking methods for consistency purposes. This methodology is considered as a generic decision making procedure, especially when – numbers are applied to real decision making problems

A multiobjective credibilistic portfolio selection model. Empirical study in the Latin American Integrated Market

[EN] This paper extends the stochastic mean-semivariance model to a fuzzy multiobjective model, where apart from return and risk, also liquidity is considered to measure the performance of a portfolio. Uncertainty of future return and liquidity of each asset are modeled using L-R type fuzzy numbers that belong to the power reference function family. The decision process of this novel approach takes into account not only the multidimensional nature of the portfolio selection problem but also realistic constraints by investors. Particularly, it optimizes the expected return, the semivariance and the expected liquidity of a given portfolio, considering cardinality constraint and upper and lower bound constraints. The constrained portfolio optimization problem resulting is solved using the algorithm NSGA-II. As a novelty, in order to select the optimal portfolio, this study defines the credibilistic Sortino ratio as the ratio between the credibilistic risk premium and the credibilistic semivariance. An empirical study is included to show the effectiveness and efficiency of the model in practical applications using a data set of assets from the Latin American Integrated Market.García García, F.; Gonzalez-Bueno, J.; Guijarro, F.; Oliver-Muncharaz, J. (2020). A multiobjective credibilistic portfolio selection model. Empirical study in the Latin American Integrated Market. Enterpreneurship and Sustainability Issues. 8(2):1027-1046. https://doi.org/10.9770/jesi.2020.8.2(62)S102710468

Multiobjective Approach to Portfolio Optimization in the Light of the Credibility Theory

[EN] The present research proposes a novel methodology to solve the problems faced by investors who take into consideration different investment criteria in a fuzzy context. The approach extends the stochastic mean-variance model to a fuzzy multiobjective model where liquidity is considered to quantify portfolio's performance, apart from the usual metrics like return and risk. The uncertainty of the future returns and the future liquidity of the potential assets are modelled employing trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. The decision process of the proposed approach considers that portfolio selection is a multidimensional issue and also some realistic constraints applied by investors. Particularly, this approach optimizes the expected return, the risk and the expected liquidity of the portfolio, considering bound constraints and cardinality restrictions. As a result, an optimization problem for the constraint portfolio appears, which is solved by means of the NSGA-II algorithm. This study defines the credibilistic Sortino ratio and the credibilistic STARR ratio for selecting the optimal portfolio. An empirical study on the S&P100 index is included to show the performance of the model in practical applications. The results obtained demonstrate that the novel approach can beat the index in terms of return and risk in the analyzed period, from 2008 until 2018.García García, F.; González-Bueno, J.; Guijarro, F.; Oliver-Muncharaz, J.; Tamosiuniene, R. (2020). Multiobjective Approach to Portfolio Optimization in the Light of the Credibility Theory. Technological and Economic Development of Economy (Online). 26(6):1165-1186. https://doi.org/10.3846/tede.2020.13189S11651186266Acerbi, C., & Tasche, D. (2002). On the coherence of expected shortfall. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26(7), 1487-1503. doi:10.1016/s0378-4266(02)00283-2Ahmed, A., Ali, R., Ejaz, A., & Ahmad, I. (2018). Sectoral integration and investment diversification opportunities: evidence from Colombo Stock Exchange. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 5(3), 514-527. doi:10.9770/jesi.2018.5.3(8)Arenas Parra, M., Bilbao Terol, A., & Rodrı́guez Urı́a, M. V. (2001). A fuzzy goal programming approach to portfolio selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 133(2), 287-297. doi:10.1016/s0377-2217(00)00298-8Arribas, I., Espinós-Vañó, M. D., García, F., & Tamošiūnienė, R. (2019). Negative screening and sustainable portfolio diversification. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 6(4), 1566-1586. doi:10.9770/jesi.2019.6.4(2)Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J.-M., & Heath, D. (1999). Coherent Measures of Risk. Mathematical Finance, 9(3), 203-228. doi:10.1111/1467-9965.00068Bawa, V. S. (1975). Optimal rules for ordering uncertain prospects. Journal of Financial Economics, 2(1), 95-121. doi:10.1016/0304-405x(75)90025-2Bermúdez, J. D., Segura, J. V., & Vercher, E. (2012). A multi-objective genetic algorithm for cardinality constrained fuzzy portfolio selection. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 188(1), 16-26. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2011.05.013Bezoui, M., Moulaï, M., Bounceur, A., & Euler, R. (2018). An iterative method for solving a bi-objective constrained portfolio optimization problem. Computational Optimization and Applications, 72(2), 479-498. doi:10.1007/s10589-018-0052-9Bi, T., Zhang, B., & Wu, H. (2013). Measuring Downside Risk Using High-Frequency Data: Realized Downside Risk Measure. Communications in Statistics - Simulation and Computation, 42(4), 741-754. doi:10.1080/03610918.2012.655826Carlsson, C., Fullér, R., & Majlender, P. (2002). A possibilistic approach to selecting portfolios with highest utility score. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 131(1), 13-21. doi:10.1016/s0165-0114(01)00251-2Chen, W., & Xu, W. (2018). A Hybrid Multiobjective Bat Algorithm for Fuzzy Portfolio Optimization with Real-World Constraints. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 21(1), 291-307. doi:10.1007/s40815-018-0533-0Choobineh, F., & Branting, D. (1986). A simple approximation for semivariance. European Journal of Operational Research, 27(3), 364-370. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(86)90332-2Deb, K., Pratap, A., Agarwal, S., & Meyarivan, T. (2002). A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Transactions on Evolutionary Computation, 6(2), 182-197. doi:10.1109/4235.996017Fang, Y., Lai, K. K., & Wang, S.-Y. (2006). Portfolio rebalancing model with transaction costs based on fuzzy decision theory. European Journal of Operational Research, 175(2), 879-893. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2005.05.020Favre, L., & Galeano, J.-A. (2002). Mean-Modified Value-at-Risk Optimization with Hedge Funds. The Journal of Alternative Investments, 5(2), 21-25. doi:10.3905/jai.2002.319052García, F., González-Bueno, J., Guijarro, F., & Oliver, J. (2020). Forecasting the Environmental, Social, and Governance Rating of Firms by Using Corporate Financial Performance Variables: A Rough Set Approach. Sustainability, 12(8), 3324. doi:10.3390/su12083324García, González-Bueno, Oliver, & Riley. (2019). Selecting Socially Responsible Portfolios: A Fuzzy Multicriteria Approach. Sustainability, 11(9), 2496. doi:10.3390/su11092496García, F., González-Bueno, J., Oliver, J., & Tamošiūnienė, R. (2019). A CREDIBILISTIC MEAN-SEMIVARIANCE-PER PORTFOLIO SELECTION MODEL FOR LATIN AMERICA. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 20(2), 225-243. doi:10.3846/jbem.2019.8317García, F., Guijarro, F., & Moya, I. (2013). A MULTIOBJECTIVE MODEL FOR PASSIVE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT: AN APPLICATION ON THE S&P 100 INDEX. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 14(4), 758-775. doi:10.3846/16111699.2012.668859García, F., Guijarro, F., & Oliver, J. (2017). Index tracking optimization with cardinality constraint: a performance comparison of genetic algorithms and tabu search heuristics. Neural Computing and Applications, 30(8), 2625-2641. doi:10.1007/s00521-017-2882-2García, F., Guijarro, F., Oliver, J., & Tamošiūnienė, R. (2018). HYBRID FUZZY NEURAL NETWORK TO PREDICT PRICE DIRECTION IN THE GERMAN DAX-30 INDEX. Technological and Economic Development of Economy, 24(6), 2161-2178. doi:10.3846/tede.2018.6394Goel, A., Sharma, A., & Mehra, A. (2018). Index tracking and enhanced indexing using mixed conditional value-at-risk. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 335, 361-380. doi:10.1016/j.cam.2017.12.015González-Bueno, J. (2019). Optimización multiobjetivo para la selección de carteras a la luz de la teoría de la credibilidad. Una aplicación en el mercado integrado latinoamericano. Editorial Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana.Gupta, P., Inuiguchi, M., & Mehlawat, M. K. (2011). A hybrid approach for constructing suitable and optimal portfolios. Expert Systems with Applications, 38(5), 5620-5632. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2010.10.073Gupta, P., Inuiguchi, M., Mehlawat, M. K., & Mittal, G. (2013). Multiobjective credibilistic portfolio selection model with fuzzy chance-constraints. Information Sciences, 229, 1-17. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2012.12.011Gupta, P., Mehlawat, M. K., Inuiguchi, M., & Chandra, S. (2014). Portfolio Optimization Using Credibility Theory. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, 127-160. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-54652-5_5Gupta, P., Mehlawat, M. K., Inuiguchi, M., & Chandra, S. (2014). Portfolio Optimization with Interval Coefficients. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, 33-59. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-54652-5_2Gupta, P., Mehlawat, M. K., Kumar, A., Yadav, S., & Aggarwal, A. (2020). A Credibilistic Fuzzy DEA Approach for Portfolio Efficiency Evaluation and Rebalancing Toward Benchmark Portfolios Using Positive and Negative Returns. International Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 22(3), 824-843. doi:10.1007/s40815-020-00801-4Gupta, P., Mehlawat, M. K., & Saxena, A. (2010). A hybrid approach to asset allocation with simultaneous consideration of suitability and optimality. Information Sciences, 180(11), 2264-2285. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2010.02.007Gupta, P., Mehlawat, M. K., Yadav, S., & Kumar, A. (2020). Intuitionistic fuzzy optimistic and pessimistic multi-period portfolio optimization models. Soft Computing, 24(16), 11931-11956. doi:10.1007/s00500-019-04639-3Gupta, P., Mittal, G., & Mehlawat, M. K. (2013). Expected value multiobjective portfolio rebalancing model with fuzzy parameters. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 52(2), 190-203. doi:10.1016/j.insmatheco.2012.12.002Heidari-Fathian, H., & Davari-Ardakani, H. (2019). Bi-objective optimization of a project selection and adjustment problem under risk controls. Journal of Modelling in Management, 15(1), 89-111. doi:10.1108/jm2-07-2018-0106Hilkevics, S., & Semakina, V. (2019). The classification and comparison of business ratios analysis methods. Insights into Regional Development, 1(1), 48-57. doi:10.9770/ird.2019.1.1(4)Huang, X. (2006). Fuzzy chance-constrained portfolio selection. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 177(2), 500-507. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2005.11.027Huang, X. (2008). Mean-semivariance models for fuzzy portfolio selection. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 217(1), 1-8. doi:10.1016/j.cam.2007.06.009Huang, X. (2009). A review of credibilistic portfolio selection. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 8(3), 263-281. doi:10.1007/s10700-009-9064-3Huang, X. (2010). Portfolio Analysis. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-11214-0Huang, X. (2017). A review of uncertain portfolio selection. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 32(6), 4453-4465. doi:10.3233/jifs-169211Huang, X., & Di, H. (2016). Uncertain portfolio selection with background risk. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 276, 284-296. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2015.12.018Huang, X., & Wang, X. (2019). International portfolio optimization based on uncertainty theory. Optimization, 70(2), 225-249. doi:10.1080/02331934.2019.1705821Huang, X., & Yang, T. (2020). How does background risk affect portfolio choice: An analysis based on uncertain mean-variance model with background risk. Journal of Banking & Finance, 111, 105726. doi:10.1016/j.jbankfin.2019.105726Jalota, H., Thakur, M., & Mittal, G. (2017). Modelling and constructing membership function for uncertain portfolio parameters: A credibilistic framework. Expert Systems with Applications, 71, 40-56. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2016.11.014Jalota, H., Thakur, M., & Mittal, G. (2017). A credibilistic decision support system for portfolio optimization. Applied Soft Computing, 59, 512-528. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2017.05.054Kaplan, P. D., & Alldredge, R. H. (1997). Semivariance in Risk-Based Index Construction. The Journal of Investing, 6(2), 82-87. doi:10.3905/joi.1997.408419Konno, H., & Yamazaki, H. (1991). Mean-Absolute Deviation Portfolio Optimization Model and Its Applications to Tokyo Stock Market. Management Science, 37(5), 519-531. doi:10.1287/mnsc.37.5.519Li, B., Zhu, Y., Sun, Y., Aw, G., & Teo, K. L. (2018). Multi-period portfolio selection problem under uncertain environment with bankruptcy constraint. Applied Mathematical Modelling, 56, 539-550. doi:10.1016/j.apm.2017.12.016Li, H.-Q., & Yi, Z.-H. (2019). Portfolio selection with coherent Investor’s expectations under uncertainty. Expert Systems with Applications, 133, 49-58. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.05.008Li, X., & Qin, Z. (2014). Interval portfolio selection models within the framework of uncertainty theory. Economic Modelling, 41, 338-344. doi:10.1016/j.econmod.2014.05.036Liagkouras, K., & Metaxiotis, K. (2015). Efficient Portfolio Construction with the Use of Multiobjective Evolutionary Algorithms: Best Practices and Performance Metrics. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 14(03), 535-564. doi:10.1142/s0219622015300013Liu, B. (2004). Uncertainty Theory. Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-39987-2Baoding Liu, & Yian-Kui Liu. (2002). Expected value of fuzzy variable and fuzzy expected value models. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 10(4), 445-450. doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2002.800692Liu, N., Chen, Y., & Liu, Y. (2018). Optimizing portfolio selection problems under credibilistic CVaR criterion. Journal of Intelligent & Fuzzy Systems, 34(1), 335-347. doi:10.3233/jifs-171298Liu, Y.-J., & Zhang, W.-G. (2018). Multiperiod Fuzzy Portfolio Selection Optimization Model Based on Possibility Theory. International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making, 17(03), 941-968. doi:10.1142/s0219622018500190Mansour, N., Cherif, M. S., & Abdelfattah, W. (2019). Multi-objective imprecise programming for financial portfolio selection with fuzzy returns. Expert Systems with Applications, 138, 112810. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2019.07.027Markowitz, H. (1952). PORTFOLIO SELECTION*. The Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77-91. doi:10.1111/j.1540-6261.1952.tb01525.xMarkowitz, H., Todd, P., Xu, G., & Yamane, Y. (1993). Computation of mean-semivariance efficient sets by the Critical Line Algorithm. Annals of Operations Research, 45(1), 307-317. doi:10.1007/bf02282055Martin, R. D., Rachev, S. (Zari), & Siboulet, F. (2003). Phi-alpha optimal portfolios and extreme risk management. Wilmott, 2003(6), 70-83. doi:10.1002/wilm.42820030619Mehlawat, M. K. (2016). Credibilistic mean-entropy models for multi-period portfolio selection with multi-choice aspiration levels. Information Sciences, 345, 9-26. doi:10.1016/j.ins.2016.01.042Mehlawat, M. K., Gupta, P., Kumar, A., Yadav, S., & Aggarwal, A. (2020). Multiobjective Fuzzy Portfolio Performance Evaluation Using Data Envelopment Analysis Under Credibilistic Framework. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 28(11), 2726-2737. doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2020.2969406Mehralizade, R., Amini, M., Sadeghpour Gildeh, B., & Ahmadzade, H. (2020). Uncertain random portfolio selection based on risk curve. Soft Computing, 24(17), 13331-13345. doi:10.1007/s00500-020-04751-9Moeini, M. (2019). Solving the index tracking problem: a continuous optimization approach. Central European Journal of Operations Research. doi:10.1007/s10100-019-00633-0Narkunienė, J., & Ulbinaitė, A. (2018). Comparative analysis of company performance evaluation methods. Entrepreneurship and Sustainability Issues, 6(1), 125-138. doi:10.9770/jesi.2018.6.1(10)Palanikumar, K., Latha, B., Senthilkumar, V. S., & Karthikeyan, R. (2009). Multiple performance optimization in machining of GFRP composites by a PCD tool using non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II). Metals and Materials International, 15(2), 249-258. doi:10.1007/s12540-009-0249-7Pflug, G. C. (2000). Some Remarks on the Value-at-Risk and the Conditional Value-at-Risk. Probabilistic Constrained Optimization, 272-281. doi:10.1007/978-1-4757-3150-7_15Rockafellar, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. The Journal of Risk, 2(3), 21-41. doi:10.21314/jor.2000.038Rockafellar, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2002). Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26(7), 1443-1471. doi:10.1016/s0378-4266(02)00271-6Rubio, A., Bermúdez, J. D., & Vercher, E. (2016). Forecasting portfolio returns using weighted fuzzy time series methods. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning, 75, 1-12. doi:10.1016/j.ijar.2016.03.007Saborido, R., Ruiz, A. B., Bermúdez, J. D., Vercher, E., & Luque, M. (2016). Evolutionary multi-objective optimization algorithms for fuzzy portfolio selection. Applied Soft Computing, 39, 48-63. doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2015.11.005Sharpe, W. F. (1966). Mutual Fund Performance. The Journal of Business, 39(S1), 119. doi:10.1086/294846Sharpe, W. F. (1994). The Sharpe Ratio. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 21(1), 49-58. doi:10.3905/jpm.1994.409501Sortino, F. A., & Price, L. N. (1994). Performance Measurement in a Downside Risk Framework. The Journal of Investing, 3(3), 59-64. doi:10.3905/joi.3.3.59Srinivas, N., & Deb, K. (1994). Muiltiobjective Optimization Using Nondominated Sorting in Genetic Algorithms. Evolutionary Computation, 2(3), 221-248. doi:10.1162/evco.1994.2.3.221Vercher, E., & Bermúdez, J. D. (2012). Fuzzy Portfolio Selection Models: A Numerical Study. Financial Decision Making Using Computational Intelligence, 253-280. doi:10.1007/978-1-4614-3773-4_10Vercher, E., & Bermudez, J. D. (2013). A Possibilistic Mean-Downside Risk-Skewness Model for Efficient Portfolio Selection. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 21(3), 585-595. doi:10.1109/tfuzz.2012.2227487Vercher, E., & Bermúdez, J. D. (2015). Portfolio optimization using a credibility mean-absolute semi-deviation model. Expert Systems with Applications, 42(20), 7121-7131. doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2015.05.020Vercher, E., Bermúdez, J. D., & Segura, J. V. (2007). Fuzzy portfolio optimization under downside risk measures. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 158(7), 769-782. doi:10.1016/j.fss.2006.10.026Wang, S., & Zhu, S. (2002). Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 1(4), 361-377. doi:10.1023/a:1020907229361Yue, W., & Wang, Y. (2017). A new fuzzy multi-objective higher order moment portfolio selection model for diversified portfolios. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 465, 124-140. doi:10.1016/j.physa.2016.08.009Yue, W., Wang, Y., & Xuan, H. (2018). Fuzzy multi-objective portfolio model based on semi-variance–semi-absolute deviation risk measures. Soft Computing, 23(17), 8159-8179. doi:10.1007/s00500-018-3452-yZadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3), 338-353. doi:10.1016/s0019-9958(65)90241-xZhai, J., & Bai, M. (2018). Mean-risk model for uncertain portfolio selection with background risk. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 330, 59-69. doi:10.1016/j.cam.2017.07.038Zhao, Z., Wang, H., Yang, X., & Xu, F. (2020). CVaR-cardinality enhanced indexation optimization with tunable short-selling constraints. Applied Economics Letters, 28(3), 201-207. doi:10.1080/13504851.2020.174015

The application of water cycle algorithm to portfolio selection

Portfolio selection is one of the most vital financial problems in literature. The studied problem is a nonlinear multi-objective problem which has been solved by a variety of heuristic and metaheuristic techniques. In this article, a metaheuristic optimiser, the multiobjective water cycle algorithm (MOWCA), is represented to find efficient frontiers associated with the standard mean-variance (MV) portfolio optimisation model. The inspired concept of WCA is based on the simulation of water cycle process in the nature. Computational results are obtained for analyses of daily data for the period January 2012 to December 2014, including S&P100 in the US, Hang Seng in Hong Kong, FTSE100 in the UK, and DAX100 in Germany. The performance of the MOWCA for solving portfolio optimisation problems has been evaluated in comparison with other multi-objective optimisers including the NSGA-II and multiobjective particle swarm optimisation (MOPSO). Four well-known performance metrics are used to compare the reported optimisers. Statistical optimisation results indicate that the applied MOWCA is an efficient and practical optimiser compared with the other methods for handling portfolio optimisation problems

Portfolio optimization based on downside risk: a mean-semivariance ef¿cient frontier from Dow Jones blue chips

To create efficient funds appealing to a sector of bank clients, the objective of minimizing downside risk is relevant to managers of funds offered by the banks. In this paper, a case focusing on this objective is developed. More precisely, the scope and purpose of the paper is to apply the mean-semivariance efficient frontier model, which is a recent approach to portfolio selection of stocks when the investor is especially interested in the constrained minimization of downside risk measured by the portfolio semivariance. Concerning the opportunity set and observation period, the mean-semivariance efficient frontier model is applied to an actual case of portfolio choice from Dow Jones stocks with daily prices observed over the period 2005¿2009. From these daily prices, time series of returns (capital gains weekly computed) are obtained as a piece of basic information. Diversification constraints are established so that each portfolio weight cannot exceed 5 per cent. The results show significant differences between the portfolios obtained by mean-semivariance efficient frontier model and those portfolios of equal expected returns obtained by classical Markowitz mean-variance efficient frontier model. Precise comparisons between them are made, leading to the conclusion that the results are consistent with the objective of reflecting downside riskPla Santamaría, D.; Bravo Selles, M. (2013). Portfolio optimization based on downside risk: a mean-semivariance ef¿cient frontier from Dow Jones blue chips. Annals of Operations Research. 205(1):189-201. doi:10.1007/s10479-012-1243-xS1892012051Aouni, B. (2009). Multi-attribute portfolio selection: new perspectives. INFOR. Information Systems and Operational Research, 47(1), 1–4.Arenas, M., Bilbao, A., & Rodríguez, M. V. (2001). A fuzzy goal programming approach to portfolio selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 133, 287–297.Arrow, K. J. (1965). Aspects of the theory of risk-bearing. Helsinki: Academic Bookstore.Ballestero, E. (2005). Mean-semivariance efficient frontier: a downside risk model for portfolio selection. Applied Mathematical Finance, 12(1), 1–15.Ballestero, E., & Pla-Santamaria, D. (2004). Selecting portfolios for mutual funds. Omega, 32, 385–394.Ballestero, E., & Pla-Santamaria, D. (2005). Grading the performance of market indicators with utility benchmarks selected from Footsie: a 2000 case study. Applied Economics, 37, 2147–2160.Ballestero, E., Pérez-Gladish, B., Arenas-Parra, M., & Bilbao-Terol, A. (2009). Selecting portfolios given multiple Eurostoxx-based uncertainty scenarios: a stochastic goal programming approach from fuzzy betas. INFOR. Information Systems and Operational Research, 47(1), 59–70.Ben Abdelaziz, F., & Masri, H. (2005). Stochastic programming with fuzzy linear partial information on time series. European Journal of Operational Research, 162(3), 619–629.Ben Abdelaziz, F., Aouni, B., & El Fayedh, R. (2007). Multi-objective stochastic programming for portfolio selection. European Journal of Operational Research, 177(3), 1811–1823.Bermúdez, J. D., Segura, J. V., & Vercher, E. (2012). A multi-objective genetic algorithm for cardinality constrained fuzzy portfolio selection. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 188, 16–26.Bilbao, A., Arenas, M., Jiménez, M., Pérez- Gladish, B., & Rodríguez, M. V. (2006). An extension of Sharpe’s single-index model: portfolio selection with expert betas. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 57(12), 1442–1451.Chang, T. J., Yang, S. Ch., & Chang, K. J. (2009). Portfolio optimization problems in different risk measures using genetic algorithm. IEEE Intelligent Systems & Their Applications, 36, 10529–10537.Haugen, R. A. (1997). Modern investment theory. Upper Saddle River: Prentice-Hall.Huang, H. J., Tzeng, G. H., & Ong, C. S. (2006). A novel algorithm for uncertain portfolio selection. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 173(1), 350–359.Konno, H., Waki, H., & Yuuki, A. (2002). Portfolio optimization under lower partial risk measures. Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, 9, 127–140.Lin, C. M., Huang, J. J., Gen, M., & Tzeng, G. H. (2006). Recurrent neural network for dynamic portfolio selection. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 175(2), 1139–1146.Markowitz, H. M. (1952). Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance, 7, 77–91.Ong, C. S., Huang, J. J., & Tzeng, G. H. (2005). A novel hybrid model for portfolio selection. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 169(2), 1195–1210.Pendaraki, K., Doumpos, M., & Zopounidis, C. (2004). Towards a goal programming methodology for constructing equity mutual fund portfolios. Journal of Asset Management, 4(6), 415–428.Pérez-Gladish, B., Jones, D. F., Tamiz, M., & Bilbao-Terol, A. (2007). An interactive three-stage model for mutual funds portfolio selection. Omega, 35(1), 75–88.Pratt, J. W. (1964). Risk aversion in the small and in the large. Econometrica, 32(1–2), 122–136.Sharpe, W. F. (1994). The Sharpe ratio. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 21(1), 49–58.Sortino, F. A., & Van der Meer, V. (1991). Downside risk. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 17(4), 27–31.Speranza, M. G. (1993). Linear programming model for portfolio optimization. Finance, 14, 107–123.Steuer, R., Qi, Y., & Hirschberger, M. (2005). Multiple objectives in portfolio selection. Journal of Financial Decision Making, 1(1), 5–20.Steuer, R., Qi, Y., & Hirschberger, M. (2007). Suitable-portfolio investors, nondominated frontier sensitivity, and the effect of multiple objectives on standard portfolio selection. Annals of Operations Research, 152, 297–317.Vercher, E., Bermúdez, J. D., & Segura, J. V. (2007). Fuzzy portfolio optimization under downside risk measures. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 158, 769–782