The growth of relative wealth and the Kelly criterion
- 194 Downloads
We propose an evolutionary framework for optimal portfolio growth theory in which investors subject to environmental pressures allocate their wealth between two assets. By considering both absolute wealth and relative wealth between investors, we show that different investor behaviors survive in different environments. When investors maximize their relative wealth, the Kelly criterion is optimal only under certain conditions, which are identified. The initial relative wealth plays a critical role in determining the deviation of optimal behavior from the Kelly criterion regardless of whether the investor is myopic across a single time period or maximizing wealth over an infinite horizon. We relate these results to population genetics, and discuss testable consequences of these findings using experimental evolution.
KeywordsKelly criterion Portfolio optimization Adaptive Markets Hypothesis Evolutionary game theory
JEL ClassificationG11 G12 D03 D11
Research support from the MIT Laboratory for Financial Engineering and the University of Rochester is greatly acknowledged.
- Bakshi, G. S., & Chen, Z. (1996). The spirit of capitalism and stock-market prices. The American Economic Review, 86, 133–157.Google Scholar
- Burnham, T. C., Dunlap, A., & Stephens, D. W. (2015). Experimental evolution and economics. SAGE Open. doi: 10.1177/2158244015612524.
- Bushee, B. J. (1998). The influence of institutional investors on myopic R&D investment behavior. Accounting Review, 73, 305–333.Google Scholar
- Frank, R. H. (1985). Choosing the right pond: Human behavior and the quest for status. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Gillespie, J. H. (1991). The causes of molecular evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Hansson, I., & Stuart, C. (1990). Malthusian selection of preferences. The American Economic Review, 80, 529–544.Google Scholar
- Hirshleifer, D., & Teoh, S. H. (2009). Thought and behavior contagion in capital markets. In Handbook of financial markets: Dynamics and evolution. Handbooks in finance (pp. 1–46). North Holland: Elsevier.Google Scholar
- Lintner, J. (1965a). Security prices, risk, and maximal gains from diversification*. The Journal of Finance, 20(4), 587–615.Google Scholar
- Lo, A. W. (2017). Adaptive markets: Financial evolution at the speed of thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
- Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance, 7(1), 77–91.Google Scholar
- Orr, H. A. (2017). Evolution, finance, and the population genetics of relative wealth. Journal of Bioeconomics, Special Issue on Experimental Evolution. doi: 10.1007/s10818-017-9254-y.
- Reilly, F., & Brown, K. (2011). Investment analysis and portfolio management. Boston: Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
- Rogers, A. R. (1994). Evolution of time preference by natural selection. American Economic Review, 84(3), 460–481.Google Scholar
- Sharpe, W. (1964). Capital asset prices: A theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. Journal of Finance, 19, 425–442.Google Scholar
- Thorp, E. O. (1971). Portfolio choice and the Kelly criterion. In Proceedings of the Business and Economics Section of the American Statistical Association (pp. 215–224).Google Scholar
- Treynor, J. L. (1965). How to rate management of investment funds. Harvard Business Review, 43(1), 63–75.Google Scholar
- Waldman, M. (1994). Systematic errors and the theory of natural selection. American Economic Review, 84(3), 482–497.Google Scholar
- Zhang, R., Brennan, T. J., & Lo, A. W. (2014b). The origin of risk aversion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA, 111(50), 17777–17782.Google Scholar