DATA-DRIVEN DECISION-MAKING AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE CORPORATE CASH MANAGEMENT PROBLEM

Esta tesis investiga el problema de gestión de tesorería desde un punto de vista multidimensional. La gestión de tesorería trata de equilibrar la cantidad que se mantiene en efectivo y la que se dedica a inversiones a corto plazo. Normalmente, los tesoreros toman decisiones basándose en el nivel óptimo de tesorería por motivos operativos y de precaución. En esta tesis exploramos las oportunidades para mejorar la toma decisiones derivadas de modelar la incertidumbre presente en los flujos de caja con la ayuda de procedimientos basados en datos en un entorno multiobjetivo. Por un lado, los tesoreros pueden conseguir ahorros a través de la previsión de tesorería. Para ello, realizamos un estudio empírico con el objetivo de aprovechar las más recientes técnicas de aprendizaje automático como paso clave para conectar el análisis de los datos disponibles con los procesos de optimización en la gestión de tesorería. Por otro lado, los tesoreros pueden estar interesados no solo en el coste sino también en al riesgo asociado a sus decisiones. Por esta razón, tratamos el problema de gestión de tesorería desde una perspectiva multiobjetivo, considerando tanto el coste como el riesgo. Además, debido a la cambiante situación financiera actual, exploramos la selección de modelos de gestión de tesorería en función de diferentes condiciones operativas y de su robustez. También demostramos la utilidad de las previsiones a través de un nuevo modelo de gestión de tesorería que mejora el estado del arte al garantizar soluciones óptimas. Como la mayoría de las empresas trabaja con sistemas de tesorería con múltiples cuentas bancarias, desarrollamos un marco para la formulación y solución del problema de gestión de tesorería con múltiples cuentas bancarias. Finalmente, en un intento de acercar teoría y práctica, también ofrecemos una librería de software en Python para usuarios interesados en la construcción de sistemas de ayuda a la toma de decisiones en gestión de tesorería.This thesis investigates the cash management problem from a multidimensional perspective. Cash management focuses on finding the balance between cash holdings and short-term investments. Typically, cash managers make decisions based usually on a firm's optimal cash balance for operational and precautionary purposes. We here explore the opportunities for improved decision-making derived from modeling cash flow uncertainty with the help of data-driven procedures within a multiobjective context. On the one hand, cash managers may achieve cost savings by forecasting future cash flows. To this end, we perform an empirical analysis of daily cash flow time-series to take advantage of modern machine learning techniques as a key step to connect data analysis and optimization methods in cash management. On the other hand, cash managers may be interested not only in the cost but also in the risk associated to decision-making. Thus, we address the cash management problem from a multiobjective perspective focusing on both cost and risk. In addition, under the current situation of time-varying financial circumstances, the selection of cash management models according to operating conditions and its robustness are worth considering questions. We also show the utility of forecasts through a new cash management model which outperforms the state-of-the-art by guaranteeing optimal solutions. Since most firms usually deal with cash management systems with multiple accounts, we develop a framework to formulate and solve the multiple bank accounts cash management problem. Finally, in an attempt to fill the gap between theory and practice, we also provide a software library in Python for practitioners interested in building decision support systems for cash management.Esta tesi investiga el problema de gestió de tresoreria des d'un punt de vista multidimensional. La gestió de tresoreria tracta d'equilibrar la quantitat que es manté en efectiu i la que es dedica a inversions a curt termini. Normalment, el tresorers prenen decisions basant-se en el nivell òptim de tresoreria per motius operatius i de precaució. En aquesta tesi explorem les oportunitats per millorar la presa de decisions derivades de modelitzar la incertesa present en els fluxos de caixa amb l'ajuda de procediments basats en dades. Per un costat, els tresorers poden aconseguir estalvis de costos mitjançant la previsió de tresoreria. Per tal d'aconseguir-ho, realitzem d'un estudi empíric amb l'objectiu d'aprofitar les més recents tècniques d'aprenentatge automàtic per connectar l'anàlisi de les dades disponbiles amb els procesos d'optimització en la gestió de tresoreria. Per altra banda, els tresorers poden estar interessats no sols en el cost sinó també en el risc associat a les seues decisions. Per tant, tractem el problema de gestió de tresoreria des d'un punt de vista multiobjectiu, fixant-se tant en el cost com en el risc. A més a més, degut a la canviant situació financera actual, explorem la selecció de models de gestió de tresoreria en funció de diferents condicions operatives i de la seua robustesa. També demostrem la utilitat de les previsions mitjançant un nou model de tresoreria que millora l'estat de l'art al garantir solucions òptimes. Com que la majoria d'empreses treballa amb sistemes de tresoreria amb múltiples comptes bancaris, desenvolupem un marc per a la formulació i solució del problema de gestió de tresoreria amb múltiples comptes bancaris. Finalment, en un intent d'apropar teoria i pràctica, també oferim un llibreria en Python per a usuaris interessats en la construcció de sistemes d'ajuda a la presa de decisions en la gestió de tresoreria.Salas Molina, F. (2017). DATA-DRIVEN DECISION-MAKING AND ITS APPLICATION TO THE CORPORATE CASH MANAGEMENT PROBLEM [Tesis doctoral no publicada]. Universitat Politècnica de València. https://doi.org/10.4995/Thesis/10251/95408TESI

Selecting cash management models from a multiobjective perspective

[EN] This paper addresses the problem of selecting cash management models under different operating conditions from a multiobjective perspective considering not only cost but also risk. A number of models have been proposed to optimize corporate cash management policies. The impact on model performance of different operating conditions becomes an important issue. Here, we provide a range of visual and quantitative tools imported from Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) analysis. More precisely, we show the utility of ROC analysis from a triple perspective as a tool for: (1) showing model performance; (2) choosingmodels; and (3) assessing the impact of operating conditions on model performance. We illustrate the selection of cash management models by means of a numerical example.Work partially funded by projects Collectiveware TIN2015-66863-C2-1-R (MINECO/FEDER) and 2014 SGR 118.Salas-Molina, F.; Rodríguez-Aguilar, JA.; Díaz-García, P. (2018). Selecting cash management models from a multiobjective perspective. Annals of Operations Research. 261(1-2):275-288. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2634-9S2752882611-2Ballestero, E. (2007). Compromise programming: A utility-based linear-quadratic composite metric from the trade-off between achievement and balanced (non-corner) solutions. European Journal of Operational Research, 182(3), 1369–1382.Ballestero, E., & Romero, C. (1998). Multiple criteria decision making and its applications to economic problems. Berlin: Springer.Bi, J., & Bennett, K. P. (2003). Regression error characteristic curves. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference on machine learning (ICML-03), pp. 43–50.Bradley, A. P. (1997). The use of the area under the roc curve in the evaluation of machine learning algorithms. Pattern Recognition, 30(7), 1145–1159.da Costa Moraes, M. B., Nagano, M. S., & Sobreiro, V. A. (2015). Stochastic cash flow management models: A literature review since the 1980s. In Decision models in engineering and management (pp. 11–28). New York: Springer.Doumpos, M., & Zopounidis, C. (2007). Model combination for credit risk assessment: A stacked generalization approach. Annals of Operations Research, 151(1), 289–306.Drummond, C., & Holte, R. C. (2000). Explicitly representing expected cost: An alternative to roc representation. In Proceedings of the sixth ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining (pp. 98–207). New York: ACM.Drummond, C., & Holte, R. C. (2006). Cost curves: An improved method for visualizing classifier performance. Machine Learning, 65(1), 95–130.Elkan, C. (2001). The foundations of cost-sensitive learning. In International joint conference on artificial intelligence (Vol. 17, pp. 973–978). Lawrence Erlbaum associates Ltd.Fawcett, T. (2006). An introduction to roc analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, 27(8), 861–874.Flach, P. A. (2003). The geometry of roc space: understanding machine learning metrics through roc isometrics. In Proceedings of the 20th international conference on machine learning (ICML-03), pp. 194–201.Garcia-Bernabeu, A., Benito, A., Bravo, M., & Pla-Santamaria, D. (2016). Photovoltaic power plants: a multicriteria approach to investment decisions and a case study in western spain. Annals of Operations Research, 245(1–2), 163–175.Glasserman, P. (2003). Monte Carlo methods in financial engineering (Vol. 53). New York: Springer.Gregory, G. (1976). Cash flow models: a review. Omega, 4(6), 643–656.Hernández-Orallo, J. (2013). Roc curves for regression. Pattern Recognition, 46(12), 3395–3411.Hernández-Orallo, J., Flach, P., & Ferri, C. (2013). Roc curves in cost space. Machine Learning, 93(1), 71–91.Hernández-Orallo, J., Lachiche, N., & Martınez-Usó, A. (2014). Predictive models for multidimensional data when the resolution context changes. In Workshop on learning over multiple contexts at ECML, volume 2014.Metz, C. E. (1978). Basic principles of roc analysis. In Seminars in nuclear medicine (Vol. 8, pp. 283–298). Amsterdam: Elsevier.Miettinen, K. (2012). Nonlinear multiobjective optimization (Vol. 12). Berlin: Springer.Ringuest, J. L. (2012). Multiobjective optimization: Behavioral and computational considerations. Berlin: Springer.Ross, S. A., Westerfield, R., & Jordan, B. D. (2002). Fundamentals of corporate finance (sixth ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Salas-Molina, F., Pla-Santamaria, D., & Rodriguez-Aguilar, J. A. (2016). A multi-objective approach to the cash management problem. Annals of Operations Research, pp. 1–15.Srinivasan, V., & Kim, Y. H. (1986). Deterministic cash flow management: State of the art and research directions. Omega, 14(2), 145–166.Steuer, R. E., 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(1), 297–317.Stone, B. K. (1972). The use of forecasts and smoothing in control limit models for cash management. Financial Management, 1(1), 72.Torgo, L. (2005). Regression error characteristic surfaces. In Proceedings of the eleventh ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery in data mining (pp. 697–702). ACM.Yu, P.-L. (1985). Multiple criteria decision making: concepts, techniques and extensions. New York: Plenum Press.Zeleny, M. (1982). Multiple criteria decision making. New York: McGraw-Hill

On the use of multiple criteria distance indexes to find robust cash management policies

[EN] Cash management decision-making can be handled from a multiobjective perspective by optimizing not only cost but also risk. Nevertheless, choosing the best policies under a changing context is by no means straightforward. To this end, we rely on compromise programming to incorporate robustness as an additional goal to cost and risk within a multiobjective framework. As a result, we propose to calculate robustness as a multiple criteria distance index that is able to identify the best compromise policies in terms of cost and risk. Such policies are also robust to cash flow regime changes. We show its utility by transforming the Miller and Orr s cash management model into its robust counterpart using real data from an industrial company.Ministerio de Economia y Competitividad [grant number Collectiveware TIN2015-66863-C2-1-R], [grant number 2014 SGR 118]. Work partially funded by projects Collectiveware TIN2015-66863-C2-1-R (MINECO/FEDER) and 2014 SGR 118.Salas-Molina, F.; Rodriguez-Aguilar, JA.; Pla Santamaría, D. (2019). On the use of multiple criteria distance indexes to find robust cash management policies. INFOR Information Systems and Operational Research. 57(3):345-360. https://doi.org/10.1080/03155986.2017.1282291S34536057

Scaling up a Project Portfolio Selection Technique by using Multiobjective Genetic Optimization

This paper proposes a multiobjective heuristic search approach to support a project portfolio selection technique on scenarios with a large number of candidate projects. The original formulation for the technique requires analyzing all combinations of the candidate projects, which turns to be unfeasible when more than a few alternatives are available. We have used a multiobjective genetic algorithm to partially explore the search space of project combinations and select the most effective ones. We present an experimental study based on four real-world project selection problems that compares the results found by the genetic algorithm to those yielded by a non-systematic search procedure (random search). A second experimental study evaluates the best parameter settings to perform the heuristic search. Experimental results show evidence that the project selection technique can be used in large-scale scenarios and that the genetic algorithm presents better results than simpler search strategies

An Evolutionary Approach to Multistage Portfolio Optimization

Portfolio optimization is an important problem in quantitative finance due to its application in asset management and corporate financial decision making. This involves quantitatively selecting the optimal portfolio for an investor given their asset return distribution assumptions, investment objectives and constraints. Analytical portfolio optimization methods suffer from limitations in terms of the problem specification and modelling assumptions that can be used. Therefore, a heuristic approach is taken where Monte Carlo simulations generate the investment scenarios and' a problem specific evolutionary algorithm is used to find the optimal portfolio asset allocations. Asset allocation is known to be the most important determinant of a portfolio's investment performance and also affects its risk/return characteristics. The inclusion of equity options in an equity portfolio should enable an investor to improve their efficient frontier due to options having a nonlinear payoff. Therefore, a research area of significant importance to equity investors, in which little research has been carried out, is the optimal asset allocation in equity options for an equity investor. A purpose of my thesis is to carry out an original analysis of the impact of allowing the purchase of put options and/or sale of call options for an equity investor. An investigation is also carried out into the effect ofchanging the investor's risk measure on the optimal asset allocation. A dynamic investment strategy obtained through multistage portfolio optimization has the potential to result in a superior investment strategy to that obtained from a single period portfolio optimization. Therefore, a novel analysis of the degree of the benefits of a dynamic investment strategy for an equity portfolio is performed. In particular, the ability of a dynamic investment strategy to mimic the effects ofthe inclusion ofequity options in an equity portfolio is investigated. The portfolio optimization problem is solved using evolutionary algorithms, due to their ability incorporate methods from a wide range of heuristic algorithms. Initially, it is shown how the problem specific parts ofmy evolutionary algorithm have been designed to solve my original portfolio optimization problem. Due to developments in evolutionary algorithms and the variety of design structures possible, a purpose of my thesis is to investigate the suitability of alternative algorithm design structures. A comparison is made of the performance of two existing algorithms, firstly the single objective stepping stone island model, where each island represents a different risk aversion parameter, and secondly the multi-objective Non-Dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm2. Innovative hybrids of these algorithms which also incorporate features from multi-objective evolutionary algorithms, multiple population models and local search heuristics are then proposed. . A novel way is developed for solving the portfolio optimization by dividing my problem solution into two parts and then applying a multi-objective cooperative coevolution evolutionary algorithm. The first solution part consists of the asset allocation weights within the equity portfolio while the second solution part consists 'ofthe asset allocation weights within the equity options and the asset allocation weights between the different asset classes. An original portfolio optimization multiobjective evolutionary algorithm that uses an island model to represent different risk measures is also proposed.Imperial Users onl

Decision support for build-to-order supply chain management through multiobjective optimization

This paper aims to identify the gaps in decision-making support based on multiobjective optimization for build-to-order supply chain management (BTOSCM). To this end, it reviews the literature available on modelling build-to-order supply chains (BTO-SC) with the focus on adopting multiobjective optimization (MOO) techniques as a decision support tool. The literature has been classified based on the nature of the decisions in different part of the supply chain, and the key decision areas across a typical BTO-SC are discussed in detail. Available software packages suitable for supporting decision making in BTO supply chains are also identified and their related solutions are outlined. The gap between the modelling and optimization techniques developed in the literature and the decision support needed in practice are highlighted and future research directions to better exploit the decision support capabilities of MOO are proposed

Decision support for build-to-order supply chain management through multiobjective optimization

This is the post-print version of the final paper published in International Journal of Production Economics. The published article is available from the link below. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. Copyright @ 2010 Elsevier B.V.This paper aims to identify the gaps in decision-making support based on multiobjective optimization (MOO) for build-to-order supply chain management (BTO-SCM). To this end, it reviews the literature available on modelling build-to-order supply chains (BTO-SC) with the focus on adopting MOO techniques as a decision support tool. The literature has been classified based on the nature of the decisions in different part of the supply chain, and the key decision areas across a typical BTO-SC are discussed in detail. Available software packages suitable for supporting decision making in BTO supply chains are also identified and their related solutions are outlined. The gap between the modelling and optimization techniques developed in the literature and the decision support needed in practice are highlighted. Future research directions to better exploit the decision support capabilities of MOO are proposed. These include: reformulation of the extant optimization models with a MOO perspective, development of decision supports for interfaces not involving manufacturers, development of scenarios around service-based objectives, development of efficient solution tools, considering the interests of each supply chain party as a separate objective to account for fair treatment of their requirements, and applying the existing methodologies on real-life data sets.Brunel Research Initiative and Enterprise Fund (BRIEF

Multiobjective genetic programming for financial portfolio management in dynamic environments

Multiobjective (MO) optimisation is a useful technique for evolving portfolio optimisation solutions that span a range from high-return/high-risk to low-return/low-risk. The resulting Pareto front would approximate the risk/reward Efficient Frontier [Mar52], and simplifies the choice of investment model for a given client’s attitude to risk. However, the financial market is continuously changing and it is essential to ensure that MO solutions are capturing true relationships between financial factors and not merely over fitting the training data. Research on evolutionary algorithms in dynamic environments has been directed towards adapting the algorithm to improve its suitability for retraining whenever a change is detected. Little research focused on how to assess and quantify the success of multiobjective solutions in unseen environments. The multiobjective nature of the problem adds a unique feature to be satisfied to judge robustness of solutions. That is, in addition to examining whether solutions remain optimal in the new environment, we need to ensure that the solutions’ relative positions previously identified on the Pareto front are not altered. This thesis investigates the performance of Multiobjective Genetic Programming (MOGP) in the dynamic real world problem of portfolio optimisation. The thesis provides new definitions and statistical metrics based on phenotypic cluster analysis to quantify robustness of both the solutions and the Pareto front. Focusing on the critical period between an environment change and when retraining occurs, four techniques to improve the robustness of solutions are examined. Namely, the use of a validation data set; diversity preservation; a novel variation on mating restriction; and a combination of both diversity enhancement and mating restriction. In addition, preliminary investigation of using the robustness metrics to quantify the severity of change for optimum tracking in a dynamic portfolio optimisation problem is carried out. Results show that the techniques used offer statistically significant improvement on the solutions’ robustness, although not on all the robustness criteria simultaneously. Combining the mating restriction with diversity enhancement provided the best robustness results while also greatly enhancing the quality of solutions

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

Feature selection for bankruptcy prediction: a multi-objective optimization approach

In this work a Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm (MOEA) was applied for feature selection in the problem of bankruptcy prediction. The aim is to maximize the accuracy of the classifier while keeping the number of features low. A two-objective problem - minimization of the number of features and accuracy maximization – was fully analyzed using two classifiers, Logistic Regression (LR) and Support Vector Machines (SVM). Simultaneously, the parameters required by both classifiers were also optimized. The validity of the methodology proposed was tested using a database containing financial statements of 1200 medium sized private French companies. Based on extensive tests it is shown that MOEA is an efficient feature selection approach. Best results were obtained when both the accuracy and the classifiers parameters are optimized. The method proposed can provide useful information for the decision maker in characterizing the financial health of a company