Computational Management Science

, Volume 15, Issue 1, pp 1–32 | Cite as

Asset allocation strategies based on penalized quantile regression

  • Giovanni Bonaccolto
  • Massimiliano Caporin
  • Sandra Paterlini
Original Paper

Abstract

It is well known that the quantile regression model used as an asset allocation tool minimizes the portfolio extreme risk whenever the attention is placed on the lower quantiles of the response variable. By considering the entire conditional distribution of the dependent variable, we show that it is possible to obtain further benefits by optimizing different risk and performance indicators. In particular, we introduce a risk-adjusted profitability measure, useful in evaluating financial portfolios from a ‘cautiously optimistic’ perspective, as the reward contribution is net of the most favorable outcomes. Moreover, as we consider large portfolios, we also cope with the dimensionality issue by introducing an \(\ell _1\)-norm penalty on the assets’ weights.

Keywords

Quantile regression \(\ell _1\)-Norm penalty Asset allocation 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the participants of the “9th Financial Risks International Forum” in Paris, organised by Institut Louis Bachelier, the “9th International Conference on Computational and Financial Econometrics” in London, the “SOFINE-CEQURA Spring Junior Research Workshop” in Nesselwang, the “Financial Econometrics and Empirical Asset Pricing Conference” in Lancaster, the seminar organized by the University of Palermo for the helpful comments and stimulating discussions. M. Caporin acknowledges financial support from the European Union, the Seventh Framework Program FP7/2007–2013 under Grant Agreement SYRTO-SSH-2012-320270, the MIUR PRIN project MISURA-Multivariate Statistical Models for Risk Assessment, the Global Risk Institute in Financial Services and the Louis Bachelier Institute. S. Paterlini acknowledges financial support from ICT COST ACTION 1408-CRONOS.

Supplementary material

References

  1. Acerbi C, Tasche D (2002) Expected shortfall: a natural coherent alternative to value at risk. Econ Notes 31(2):379–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aït-Sahalia Y, Xiu D (2015) Principal component estimation of a large covariance matrix with high-frequency data. Technical report, Princeton University and The University of ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  3. Alexander G, Baptista AM (2002) Economic implications of using a mean–var model for portfolio selection: a comparison with mean–variance analysis. J Econ Dyn Control 26(7–8):1159–1193CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ando T, Bai J (2015) Asset pricing with a general multifactor structure. J Financ Econom 13(3):556–604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Artzner P, Delbaen F, Eber J, Heath D (1999) Coherent measures of risk. Math Finance 9(3):203–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Azzalini A (2014) The skew-normal and related families. IMS monograph series. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  7. Basak S, Shapiro A (2001) Value-at-risk based risk management: optimal policies and asset prices. Rev Financ Stud 14(2):371–405CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bassett G, Koenker R, Kordas G (2004) Pessimistic portfolio allocation and choquet expected utility. J Financ Econom 2(4):477–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Belloni A, Chernozhukov V (2011) L1-penalized quantile regression in high-dimensional sparse models. Ann Stat 39(1):82–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Britten-Jones M (1999) The sampling error in estimates of mean–variance efficient portfolio weights. J Finance 54(2):655–671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Brodie M (1993) Computing efficient frontiers using estimated parameters. Ann Oper Res 45(1):21–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brodie J, Daubechies I, Mol CD, Giannone D, Loris I (2009) Sparse and stable markowitz portfolios. PNAS 106(30):12267–12272CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Caporin M, Jannin G, Lisi F, Maillet B (2014) A survey on the four families of performance measures. J Econ Surv 28(5):917–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chen SX (2008) Nonparametric estimation of expected shortfall. J Financ Econom 6(1):87–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Chopra VK, Ziemba T (1993) The effect of errors in means, variances and covariances on optimal portfolio choice. J Portfolio Manag 19(2):6–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ciliberti S, Kondor I, Mezard M (2007) On the feasibility of portfolio optimization under expected shortfall. Quant Finance 7(4):389–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Cont R (2001) Empirical properties of asset returns: stylized facts and statistical issues. Quant Finance 1(2):223–236CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Davino C, Furno M, Vistocco D (2014) Quantile regression: theory and applications. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  19. DeMiguel V, Garlappi L, Nogales FJ, Uppal R (2009) A generalized approach to portfolio optimization: improving performance by constraining portfolio norms. Manag Sci 55(5):798–812CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fan J, Zhang J, Yu K (2012) Vast portfolio selection with gross-exposure constraints. J Am Stat Assoc 107(498):592–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fan J, Furger A, Xiu D (2016) Incorporating global industrial classification standard into portfolio allocation: a simple factor-based large covariance matrix estimator with high frequency data. J Bus Econ Stat. doi: 10.1080/07350015.2015.1052458 Google Scholar
  22. Farinelli S, Ferreira M, Rossello D, Thoeny M, Tibiletti L (2008) Beyond sharpe ratio: optimal asset allocation using different performance ratios. J Bank Finance 32(10):2057–2063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Fastrich B, Paterlini S, Winker P (2015) Constructing optimal sparse portfolios using regularization methods. Comput Manag Sci 12(3):417–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fitzenberger B, Winker P (2007) Improving the computation of censored quantile regressions. Comput Stat Data Anal 1(52):88–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gotoh J, Takeda A (2011) On the role of norm constraints in portfolio selection. Comput Manag Sci 8(4):323–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Härdle WK, Nasekin S, Chuen DLK, Fai PK (2014) Tedas—tail event driven asset allocation. SFB 649 discussion papers SFB649DP2014-032, Sonderforschungsbereich 649, Humboldt University, Berlin, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  27. Hastie T, Tibshirani R, Friedman J (2009) The elements of statistical learning. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jagannathan R, Ma T (2003) Risk reduction in large portfolios: why imposing the wrong constraints helps. J Finance 54(4):1651–1683CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Keating C, Shadwick WF (2002) A universal performance measure. The Finance Development Centre, LondonGoogle Scholar
  30. Kocherginsky M (2003) Extensions of the Markov chain marginal bootstrap. Ph.D. thesis, University of Illinois Urbana-ChampaignGoogle Scholar
  31. Koenker R (2005) Quantile regression, vol 38. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Koenker R, Bassett G (1978) Regression quantiles. Econometrica 46(1):33–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Konno H, Yamazaki H (1991) Mean-absolute deviation portfolio optimization model and its applications to Tokyo stock market. Manag Sci 37(5):519–531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kourtis A, Dotsis G, Markellos RN (2012) Parameter uncertainty in portfolio selection: shrinking the inverse covariance matrix. J Bank Finance 36(9):2522–2531CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Krokhmal P, Palmquist J, Uryasev S (2002) Portfolio optimization with conditional value-at-risk objective and constraints. J Risk 4(2):43–68CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Ledoit O, Wolf M (2008) Robust performance hypothesis testing with the sharpe ratio. J Empir Finance 15:850–859CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Li Y, Zhu J (2008) L1-norm quantile regression. J Comput Graph Stat 17(1):163–185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lintner J (1965a) Security prices, risk and maximal gains from diversification. J Finance 20(4):587–615Google Scholar
  39. Lintner J (1965b) The valuation of risk assets and the selection of risky investments in stock portfolios and capital budgets. Rev Econ Stat 47(1):13–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Mansini R, Ogryczak W, Speranza M (2007) Conditional value at risk and related linear programming models for portfolio optimization. Ann Oper Res 152(1):227–256CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Markowitz H (1952) Portfolio selection. J Finance 7(1):77–91Google Scholar
  42. Mossin J (1966) Equilibrium in a capital asset market. Econometrica 35(4):768–783CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Ortobelli S, Stoyanov S, Fabozzi F, Biglova F (2005) The proper use of risk measures in portfolio theory. Int J Theor Appl Finance 8(8):1107–1133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Rockafellar R, Uryasev S (2000) Optimization of conditional var. J Risk 2(3):21–41CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Sharpe W (1964) Capital asset prices: a theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. J Finance 19(3):425–442Google Scholar
  46. Statman M (1987) How many stocks make a diversified portfolio. J Financ Quant Anal 22(3):353–363CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tian S, Yu Y, Guo H (2015) Variable selection and corporate bankruptcy forecasts. J Bank Finance 52:89–100CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Tibshirani R (1996) Regression analysis and selection via the lasso. J R Stat Soc Ser B 58(1):267–288Google Scholar
  49. Xing X, Hu J, Yang Y (2014) Robust minimum variance portfolio with l-infinity constraints. J Bank Finance 46:107–117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yen Y, Yen T (2014) Solving norm constrained portfolio optimization via coordinate-wise descent algorithms. Comput Stat Data Anal 76:737–759CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Giovanni Bonaccolto
    • 1
  • Massimiliano Caporin
    • 2
  • Sandra Paterlini
    • 3
  1. 1.University “Kore” of EnnaEnnaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Statistical SciencesUniversity of PadovaPaduaItaly
  3. 3.Department of Finance and AccountingEuropean Business SchoolWiesbadenGermany

Personalised recommendations