Mean-Variance Optimization Is a Good Choice, But for Other Reasons than You Might Think
Faculty of Economics and Management, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano, 39100 Bolzano, Italy
Risks 2020, 8(1), 29; https://doi.org/10.3390/risks8010029
Received: 22 January 2020 / Revised: 8 March 2020 / Accepted: 10 March 2020 / Published: 14 March 2020
Mean-variance portfolio optimization is more popular than optimization procedures that employ downside risk measures such as the semivariance, despite the latter being more in line with the preferences of a rational investor. We describe strengths and weaknesses of semivariance and how to minimize it for asset allocation decisions. We then apply this approach to a variety of simulated and real data and show that the traditional approach based on the variance generally outperforms it. The results hold even if the CVaR is used, because all downside risk measures are difficult to estimate. The popularity of variance as a measure of risk appears therefore to be rationally justified.
View Full-Text
▼
Show Figures
Figure 1
This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited
MDPI and ACS Style
Rigamonti, A. Mean-Variance Optimization Is a Good Choice, But for Other Reasons than You Might Think. Risks 2020, 8, 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks8010029
AMA Style
Rigamonti A. Mean-Variance Optimization Is a Good Choice, But for Other Reasons than You Might Think. Risks. 2020; 8(1):29. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks8010029
Chicago/Turabian StyleRigamonti, Andrea. 2020. "Mean-Variance Optimization Is a Good Choice, But for Other Reasons than You Might Think" Risks 8, no. 1: 29. https://doi.org/10.3390/risks8010029
Find Other Styles
Note that from the first issue of 2016, MDPI journals use article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.
Search more from Scilit
