In practice, monitoring and managing a portfolio with many assets is not only time consuming but also expensive. It is therefore ideal to pick a reasonable number of stocks to address these two issues. However, this has not been considered in traditional portfolio methods. In addition, the traditional portfolio methods often cause too extreme long and short positions, which implies a high trading cost. To this end, a new method of portfolio selection through adding norm constraints is proposed to the standard CVaR portfolio investment selection model. The basic idea of our method comes from variable selection procedure like LASSO in statistics and contains three important aspects. First, it is illustrated that the process of solving the CVaR portfolio selection model is equivalent to a classical quantile regression problem. As we all know, quantile regression approach is efficient to describe the behavior of a financial asset across quantiles, which is corresponding to a CVaR value. Second, the CVaR portfolio selection model with norm constraints is solved through LASSO quantile regression approach. Third, selection criterions for optimal number of financial assets are compared through Monte Carlo numerical simulations considering two cases:n>p and np and n p case. For illustration, we also do empirical analysis on Shanghai and Shenzhen 300 (HS300) index. The sample period spans from Apr 11, 2011 to Nov 11, 2013. Note that the 300 constituent stocks in HS300 are always changing in the sample period since the sample is adjusted every half year. Those stocks are intersected and ultimately 230 constituent stocks are kept for a portfolio candidate. It shows that with norm constraints, our method avoids two extreme positions effectively. Moreover, our method is efficient for solving high dimension portfolio selection and outperforms some popular method like L1-Variance model in dispersing tail risk of portfolio only using a small amount of financial assets. For example, our method reduces the VaR by 30.28% in sample and 0.69% out of sample, while reduces the CVaR by 44.92% in sample and 10.42% out of sample. To sum up, our new method is a general one that includes the standard CVaR-based portfolio selection model as a special case. It is certainly that our method can be improved by utilizing some alternative constraints like SCAD (Softly Clipped Absolute Deviation) penalty. This penalty will bring an unbiased results, which does not have in our current method. This is left for future research.
XU Qi-fa, ZHOU Ying-ying, JIANG Cui-xia
. CVaR Based High Dimensional Portfolio Selection under Norm Constraints[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2017
, 25(2)
: 40
-49
.
DOI: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2017.02.005
[1] Markowitz H. Portfolio selection[J]. The Journal of Finance, 1952, 7(1):77-91.
[2] Artzner P, Delbaen F, Eber J M, 等. Coherent measures of risk[J]. Mathematical Finance, 1999, 9(3):203-228.
[3] 杜红军, 王宗军. 基于Copula-AL法的VaR和CVaR的度量与分配[J]. 中国管理科学, 2012, 20(3):1-9.
[4] Rockafellar R T, Uryasev S. Optimization of conditional value-at-risk[J]. Journal of Risk, 2000, 2(3):21-42.
[5] Rockafellar R T, Uryasev S. Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions[J]. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2002, 26(7):1443-1471.
[6] Quaranta A G, Zaffaroni A. Robust optimization of conditional value at risk and portfolio selection[J]. Journal of Banking & Finance, 2008, 32(10):2046-2056.
[7] De Giorgi E. A note on portfolio selections under various risk measures[R]. Working Paper, Citeseer, 2002.
[8] 许启发, 张金秀, 蒋翠侠. 基于非线性分位数回归模型的多期VaR风险测度[J]. 中国管理科学, 2015, 23(3):56-65.
[9] Koenker R, Bassett Jr G W. Regression quantiles[J]. Econometrica, 1978, 46(1):33-50.
[10] Bassett Jr G W, Koenker R, Kordas G. Pessimistic portfolio allocation and Choquet expected utility[J]. Journal of Financial Econometrics, 2004, 2(4):477-492.
[11] Laurini MP, Vieira HP. Pessimistic preferences and portfolio allocation-Emprical analysis and applications in risk management[J]. Revista de Economia e Administra, 2006, 6(3):347.
[12] 陈守东, 王妍. 我国金融机构的系统性金融风险评估-基于极端分位数回归技术的风险度量[J]. 中国管理科学, 2014, 22(7):10-17.
[13] 陈艺萍, 张信东, 史金凤. 零杠杆公司业绩研究[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(6):171-176.
[14] Yen Y-M, Yen T-J. Solving norm constrained portfolio optimization via coordinate-wise descent algorithms[J]. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 2014, 76(2):737-759.
[15] Fan Jiarqing, Zhang Jingjin, Yu Ke. Vast portfolio selection with gross-exposure constraints[J]. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 2012, 107(498):592-606.
[16] Brodie J, Daubechies I, De Mol C, et al. Loris I. Sparse and stable Markowitz portfolios[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009, 106(30):12267-12272.
[17] Fastrich B, Paterlini S, Winker P. Constructing optimal sparse portfolios using regularization methods[J]. Computational Management Science, 2012, 12(3):417-434.
[18] Zheng Qi, Gallagher C, Kulasekera K B. Adaptive penalized quantile regression for high dimensional data[J]. Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference, 2013, 143(6):1029-1038.
[19] Belloni A, Chernozhukov V. L1-penalized quantile regression in high-dimensional sparse models[J]. The Annals of Statistics, 2011, 39(1):82-130.
[20] 张茂军, 秦学志, 南江霞. 损失厌恶下带有风险约束的委托投资组合模型[J]. 系统工程学报, 2012, 27(4):513-519.
[21] 苏治, 秦磊, 方彤. 含有图结构约束的稀疏最小方差资产组合模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2015, 23(9):65-70.
[22] Chen Yan, Wang Xuancheng. A hybrid stock trading system using genetic network programming and mean conditional value-at-risk[J]. European Journal of Operational Research, 2015, 240(3):861-871.
[23] 邱若臻, 苑红涛, 黄小原. 基于似然估计的零售商库存鲁棒均值-风险模型[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(8):123-131.
[24] 黄金波, 李仲飞, 周鸿涛. 期望效用视角下的风险对冲效率[J]. 中国管理科学, 2016, 24(3):9-17.
[25] Tibshirani R. Regression shrinkage and selection via the lasso[J]. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society:Series B, 1996, 58(1):267-288.
[26] Li Youjuan, Zhu Ji. L1-norm quantile regression[J]. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics, 2008, 17(1):163-185.
[27] 蒋翠侠, 刘玉叶, 许启发. 基于LASSO分位数回归的对冲基金投资策略研究[J]. 管理科学学报, 2016, 19(3):107-126.
[28] Koenker R, Ng P, Portnoy S. Quantile smoothing splines[J]. Biometrika, 1994, 81(4):673-680.
