Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Characterizing compromise solutions for investors with uncertain risk preferences

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Operational Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The optimum portfolio selection for an investor with particular preferences was proven to lie on the normalized efficient frontier between two bounds defined by the Ballestero (J Oper Res Soc 49:998–1000, 1998) bounding theorem. A deeper understanding is possible if the decision-maker is provided with visual and quantitative techniques. Here, we derive useful insights as a way to support investor’s decision-making through: (1) a new theorem to assess balance of solutions; (2) a procedure and a new plot to deal with discrete efficient frontiers and uncertain risk preferences; and (3) two quality metrics useful to predict long-run performance of investors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amiri M, Ekhtiari M, Yazdani M (2011) Nadir compromise programming: a model for optimization of multi-objective portfolio problem. Expert Syst Appl 38(6):7222–7226

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballestero E (1998) Approximating the optimum portfolio for an investor with particular preferences. J Oper Res Soc 49:998–1000

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballestero E (2007) Compromise programming: a utility-based linear-quadratic composite metric from the trade-off between achievement and balanced (non-corner) solutions. Eur J Oper Res 182(3):1369–1382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballestero E, Pla-Santamaria D (2004) Selecting portfolios for mutual funds. Omega 32(5):385–394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballestero E, Pla-Santamaria D, Garcia-Bernabeu A, Hilario A (2015) Portfolio selection by compromise programming. In: Ballestero E, Pérez-Gladish B, Garcia-Bernabeu A (eds) Socially responsible investment. A multi-criteria decision making approach, vol 219. Springer, Switzerland, pp 177–196

    Google Scholar 

  • Ballestero E, Romero C (1996) Portfolio selection: a compromise programming solution. J Oper Res Soc 47(11):1377–1386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ballestero E, Romero C (1998) Multiple criteria decision making and its applications to economic problems. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bilbao-Terol A, Pérez-Gladish B, Arenas-Parra M, Rodríguez-Uría MV (2006) Fuzzy compromise programming for portfolio selection. Appl Math Comput 173(1):251–264

    Google Scholar 

  • Bravo M, Ballestero E, Pla-Santamaria D (2012) Evaluating fund performance by compromise programming with linear-quadratic composite metric: an actual case on the caixabank in spain. J Multi-Criteria Decis Anal 19(5–6):247–255

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehrgott M, Klamroth K, Schwehm C (2004) An MCDM approach to portfolio optimization. Eur J Oper Res 155(3):752–770

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fawcett T (2006) An introduction to ROC analysis. Pattern Recognit Lett 27(8):861–874

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hernández-Orallo J, Flach P, Ferri C (2013) ROC curves in cost space. Mach Learn 93(1):71–91

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz H (1952) Portfolio selection. J Finance 7(1):77–91

    Google Scholar 

  • Pla-Santamaria D, Bravo M (2013) Portfolio optimization based on downside risk: a mean-semivariance efficient frontier from dow jones blue chips. Ann Oper Res 205(1):189–201

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ringuest JL (1992) Multiobjective optimization: behavioral and computational considerations. Springer Science & Business Media, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Steuer RE, Qi Y, Hirschberger M (2007) Suitable-portfolio investors, nondominated frontier sensitivity, and the effect of multiple objectives on standard portfolio selection. Ann Oper Res 152(1):297–317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Xidonas P, Mavrotas G, Krintas T, Psarras J, Zopounidis C (2012) Multicriteria portfolio management. Springer, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Yu P-L (1973) A class of solutions for group decision problems. Manag Sci 19(8):936–946

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yu P-L (1985) Multiple criteria decision making: concepts, techniques and extensions. Plenum Press, Berlin

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Zeleny M (1982) Multiple criteria decision making. McGraw-Hill, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Work partially funded by projects Collectiveware TIN2015-66863-C2-1-R (MINECO/FEDER) and 2014 SGR 118.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hilaturas Ferre, S.A., Les Molines, 2, 03450, Banyeres de Mariola, Alicante, Spain

    Francisco Salas-Molina

  2. IIIA-CSIC, Campus UAB, 08913, Cerdanyola, Catalonia, Spain

    Juan A. Rodríguez-Aguilar

  3. Escuela Politécnica Superior de Alcoy, Ferrándiz y Carbonell, s/n, 03801, Alcoy, Alicante, Spain

    David Pla-Santamaria

Authors
  1. Francisco Salas-Molina
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Juan A. Rodríguez-Aguilar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David Pla-Santamaria
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francisco Salas-Molina.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Salas-Molina, F., Rodríguez-Aguilar, J.A. & Pla-Santamaria, D. Characterizing compromise solutions for investors with uncertain risk preferences. Oper Res Int J 19, 661–677 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0309-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12351-017-0309-6

Keywords

Mathematics Subject Classification

Search

Navigation