Annals of Operations Research

, Volume 229, Issue 1, pp 409–427 | Cite as

Two-stage portfolio optimization with higher-order conditional measures of risk

  • Sıtkı Gülten
  • Andrzej RuszczyńskiEmail author


We describe a study of application of novel risk modeling and optimization techniques to daily portfolio management. In the first part of the study, we develop and compare specialized methods for scenario generation and scenario tree construction. In the second part, we construct a two-stage stochastic programming problem with conditional measures of risk, which is used to re-balance the portfolio on a rolling horizon basis, with transaction costs included in the model. In the third part, we present an extensive simulation study on real-world data of several versions of the methodology. We show that two-stage models outperform single-stage models in terms of long-term performance. We also show that using high-order risk measures is superior to first-order measures.


Stochastic programming Scenario tree generation Coherent measures of risk Portfolio optimization Risk 


  1. Arthur, D., & Vassilvitskii, S. (2007). k-means++: The advantages of careful seeding. Proceedings of the eighteenth annual ACM-SIAM symposium on Discrete algorithms. SIAM, pp. 1027–1035.Google Scholar
  2. Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J. M., & Heath, D. (1999). Coherent measures of risk. Mathematical Finance, 9, 203–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J. M., Heath, D., & Ku, H. (2007). Coherent multiperiod risk adjusted values and Bellmans principle. Annals of Operations Research, 152, 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cheridito, P., Delbaen, F., & Kupper, M. (2006). Dynamic monetary risk measures for bounded discrete-time processes. Electronic Journal of Probability, 11, 57–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Föllmer, H., & Penner, I. (2006). Convex risk measures and the dynamics of their penalty functions. Statistics Decisions, 24(1), 61–96.Google Scholar
  6. Fritelli, M. M., & Scandolo, G. (2006). Risk measures and capital requirements for processes. Mathematical Finance, 16, 589–612.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Heitsch, H., & Romisch, W. (2009). Scenario tree modeling for multistage stochastic programs. Mathematical Programming, 118(2), 371–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Heitsch, H., Romisch, W., & Strugarek, C. (2006). Stability of multistage stochastic programs. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 17, 511–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hochreiter, R., & Pflug, G. Ch. (2007). Financial scenario generation for stochastic multi-stage decision processes as facility location problems. Annals of Operations Research, 152, 257–272.Google Scholar
  10. Kijima, M., & Ohnishi, M. (1993). Mean-risk analysis of risk aversion and wealth effects on optimal portfolios with multiple investment opportunities. Annals of Operations Research, 45, 147–163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Mansini, R., Ogryczak, W., & Speranza, M. G. (2003). LP solvable models for portfolio optimization: A classification and computational comparison. IMA Journal of Management Mathematics, 14(3), 187–220.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Markowitz, H. M. (1952). Portfolio selection. Journal of Finance, 7, 77–91.Google Scholar
  13. Matmoura, Y., & Penev, S. (2013). Multistage optimization of option portfolio using higher order coherent risk measures. European Journal of Operational Research, 227(1), 190–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Miller, N. L. (2008). Mean-risk portfolio optimization problems with risk-adjusted measures. PhD thesis, Rutgers University.Google Scholar
  15. Miller, N., & Ruszczyński, A. (2011). Risk-averse two-stage stochastic linear programming: Modeling and decomposition. Operations Research, 59, 125–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Ogryczak, W., & Ruszczyński, A. (1999). From stochastic dominance to mean-risk models: Semideviations as risk measures. European Journal of Operational Research, 116(1), 33–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ogryczak, W., & Ruszczyński, A. (2001). On consistency of stochastic dominance and mean-semideviation models. Mathematical Programming, 89, 217–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Ogryczak, W., & Ruszczyński, A. (2002). Dual stochastic dominance and related mean-risk models. SIAM Journal on Optimization, 13, 60–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Pflug, G. Ch. (2001). Scenario tree generation for multiperiod financial optimization by optimal discretization. Mathematical Programming, 89, 251–271.Google Scholar
  20. Pflug, G. Ch., & Römisch, W. (2007). Modeling, measuring and managing risk. Singapore: World Scientific.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Riedel, F. (2004). Dynamic coherent risk measures. Stochastic Processes and Their Applications, 112, 185–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rockafellar, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of conditional value at risk. The Journal of Risk, 2, 21–41.Google Scholar
  23. Rockafellar, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2002). Conditional value at risk for general loss distributions. Journal of Banking and Finance, 26, 1443–1471.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Ruszczyński, A. (2003). Decomposition methods. In A. Ruszczyński & A. Shapiro (Eds.), Stochastic Programming (pp. 141–211). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ruszczyński, A. (2006). Nonlinear Optimization. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  26. Ruszczyński, A. (2010). Risk-averse dynamic programming for Markov decision processes. Mathematical Programming, 125(2), 235–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ruszczyński, A., & Vanderbei, R. (2003). Frontiers of stochastically nondominated portfolios. Econometrica, 71, 1287–1297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Ruszczyński, A., & Shapiro, A. (2006a). Conditional risk mappings. Mathematical Operations Research, 31, 544–561.Google Scholar
  29. Ruszczyński, A., & Shapiro, A. (2006b). Optimization of convex risk functions. Mathematical Operations Research, 31, 433–452.Google Scholar
  30. Shapiro, A., Dentcheva, D., & Ruszczyński, A. (2009). Lectures on stochastic programming: Modeling and theory. SIAM.Google Scholar
  31. SPSS Inc. (2004).TwoStep Cluster Analysis. Technical Report.Google Scholar
  32. Van Der Weide, R. (2002). GO-GARCH: A multivariate generalized orthogonal GARCH model. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 17(5), 549–564.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Management Science and Information SystemsRutgers UniversityNewarkUSA
  2. 2.Department of Management Science and Information SystemsRutgers UniversityPiscatawayUSA

Personalised recommendations