Does Marginal VaR Lead to Improved Performance of Managed Portfolios: A Study of S&P BSE 100 and S&P BSE 200

  • Shrey Jain
  • Siddhartha P. ChakrabartyEmail author
Original Research


In order to improve upon the performance of a managed portfolio, we propose the use of Marginal Value-at-Risk (MVaR) to ascertain the desirability of assets for inclusion in the managed portfolio, prior to obtaining the optimal managed portfolio. In particular, this is applied on a larger index which comprises of a greater number of assets than a benchmark index and the larger index includes all the assets from the benchmark index. The resulting MVaR index includes exactly the same number of assets as the benchmark index. An empirical study with S&P BSE 100 as the benchmark index, with the MVaR index being derived from S&P BSE 200, with five different optimization problems shows outperformance by the MVaR portfolio over the benchmark portfolio. This highlights the advantage of the inclusion of MVaR resulting in improved performance of the managed portfolio.


Marginal Value-at-Risk Portfolio optimization S&P BSE 100 S&P BSE 200 



The authors express their gratitude to both the reviewers for their detailed comments which resulted in an improved manuscript.


  1. Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J.-M., & Heath, D. (1999). Coherent measures of risk. Mathematical Finance, 9(3), 203–228.Google Scholar
  2. Birge, J. R., & Louveaux, F. (1997). Introduction to stochastic programming. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  3. Black, F., & Litterman, R. (1992). Global portfolio optimization. Financial Analysts Journal, 48(5), 28–43.Google Scholar
  4. Cai, X., Teo, K. L., Yang, X., & Zhou, X. Y. (2000). Portfolio optimization under a minimax rule. Management Science, 46(7), 957–972.Google Scholar
  5. Cheung, Y. H., & Powell, R. J. (2012). Anybody can do value at risk: A nonparametric teaching study. Australasian Accounting, Business and Finance Journal, 6(1), 111–123.Google Scholar
  6. Dentcheva, D., & Ruszczynski, A. (2006). Portfolio optimization with stochastic dominance constraints. Journal of Banking and Finance, 30(2), 433–451.Google Scholar
  7. Fabozzi, F. J., Kolm, P. N., Pachamanova, D. A., & Focardi, S. M. (2007). Robust portfolio optimization and management. Hoboken: Wiley.Google Scholar
  8. Francis, J. C., & Kim, D. (2013). Modern portfolio theory: Foundations, analysis, and new developments (Vol. 795). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  9. Gaivoronski, A. A., & Pflug, G. (2005). Value-at-risk in portfolio optimization: Properties and computational approach. The Journal of Risk, 7(2), 1–31.Google Scholar
  10. Gotoh, J. Y., & Takano, Y. (2007). Newsvendor solutions via conditional value-at-risk minimization. European Journal of Operational Research, 179(1), 80–96.Google Scholar
  11. Hallerbach, W. G. (1999). Decomposing portfolio Value-at-Risk: A general analysis (No. 99-034/2). Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper.Google Scholar
  12. Investopedia. (2019). Retrieved August 1, 2019 from
  13. Kapsos, M., Zymler, S., Christofides, N., & Rustem, B. (2014). Optimizing the Omega ratio using linear programming. Journal of Computational Finance, 17(4), 49–57.Google Scholar
  14. Keating, C., & Shadwick, W. F. (2002). A universal performance measure. Journal of Performance Measurement, 6(3), 59–84.Google Scholar
  15. Kim, J. H., Kim, W. C., & Fabozzi, F. J. (2014). Recent developments in robust portfolios with a worst—Case approach. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications, 161(1), 103–121.Google Scholar
  16. Konno, H., & Shirakawa, H. (1994). Equilibrium relations in a capital asset market: A mean absolute deviation approach. Financial Engineering and the Japanese Markets, 1(1), 21–35.Google Scholar
  17. Konno, H., Shirakawa, H., & Yamazaki, H. (1993). A mean-absolute deviation-skewness portfolio optimization model. Annals of Operations Research, 45(1), 205–220.Google Scholar
  18. Konno, H., & Yamazaki, H. (1991). Mean-absolute deviation portfolio optimization model and its applications to Tokyo stock market. Management Science, 37(5), 519–531.Google Scholar
  19. Kopa, M., & Chovanec, P. (2008). A second-order stochastic dominance portfolio efficiency measure. Kybernetika, 44(2), 243–258.Google Scholar
  20. Krokhmal, P., Palmquist, J., & Uryasev, S. (2002). Portfolio optimization with conditional value-at-risk objective and constraints. The Journal of Risk, 4, 43–68.Google Scholar
  21. Leitner, J. (2005). A short note on second-order stochastic dominance preserving coherent risk measures. Mathematical Finance, 15(4), 649–651.Google Scholar
  22. Linsmeier, T. J., & Pearson, N. D. (1996). Risk measurement: An introduction to value-at-risk. Technical report 96-04, OFOR, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.Google Scholar
  23. Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77–91.Google Scholar
  24. Marshell, A. W., & Olkin, I. (1979). Inequalities: Theory of majorization and its applications. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  25. Mausser, H., Saunders, D., & Seco, L. (2006). Optimizing Omega. Risk, 19(11), 88–92.Google Scholar
  26. Mavrotas, G. (2009). Effective implementation of the \(\epsilon\)-constraint method in multi-objective mathematical programming problems. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 213(2), 455–465.Google Scholar
  27. Michalowski, W., & Ogryczak, W. (2001). Extending the MAD portfolio optimization model to incorporate downside risk aversion. Naval Research Logistics, 48(3), 185–200.Google Scholar
  28. Michaud, R. O. (1989). The Markowitz optimization enigma: Is “optimized” optimal? Financial Analysts Journal, 45(1), 31–42.Google Scholar
  29. Ogryczak, W., & Ruszczynski, A. (1999). From stochastic dominance to mean-risk models: Semideviations as risk measures. European Journal of Operational Research, 116(1), 33–50.Google Scholar
  30. Polak, G. G., Rogers, D. F., & Sweeney, D. J. (2010). Risk management strategies via minimax portfolio optimization. European Journal of Operational Research, 207(1), 409–419.Google Scholar
  31. Rau-Bredow, H. (2004). Value at risk, expected shortfall, and marginal risk contribution. In G. Szego (Ed.), Risk measures for the 21st century (pp. 61–68).Google Scholar
  32. Rockafeller, R. T., & Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. The Journal of Risk, 2, 21–42.Google Scholar
  33. Sharma, A., & Mehra, A. (2013). Portfolio selection with a minimax measure in safety constraint. Optimization, 62(11), 1473–1500.Google Scholar
  34. Sharma, A., & Mehra, A. (2017). Extended omega ratio optimization for risk-averse investors. International Transactions in Operational Research, 24(3), 485–506.Google Scholar
  35. Speranza, M. G. (1994). Linear models for portfolio selection and their application to the Milano stock market. In: Financial modelling (pp. 320–333). Physica-Verlag HD.Google Scholar
  36. Teo, K. L., & Yan, X. Q. (2001). Portfolio selection problem with minimax type risk function. Annals of Operations Research, 101(1–4), 333–349.Google Scholar
  37. Von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1947). Theory of games and economic behaviour. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  38. Young, M. R. (1998). A minimax portfolio selection rule with linear programming solution. Management Science, 44(5), 673–683.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan KK, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of MathematicsIndian Institute of Technology GuwahatiGuwahatiIndia

Personalised recommendations