1 / 24

Covariance Estimation For Markowitz Portfolio Optimization

Covariance Estimation For Markowitz Portfolio Optimization. Ka Ki Ng Nathan Mullen Priyanka Agarwal Dzung Du Rezwanuzzaman Chowdhury. Outline:. Michaud’s Resampling combined with Ledoit’s estimators Weight Descriptor Return Analysis Standard error Conclusion and Future Research.

horace
Download Presentation

Covariance Estimation For Markowitz Portfolio Optimization

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Covariance Estimation For Markowitz Portfolio Optimization Ka Ki Ng Nathan Mullen PriyankaAgarwal Dzung Du RezwanuzzamanChowdhury

  2. Outline: • Michaud’s Resampling combined with Ledoit’s estimators • Weight Descriptor • Return Analysis • Standard error • Conclusion and Future Research

  3. Resampling combined with Ledoit’s Estimate (μ, Σ) from the observed data using estimators in Ledoit’s paper Propose the distribution for the returns, e.g., Returns ~ N(μ, Σ) – meaning prices follow log-normal distributions Resample n (large) of Monte Carlo scenarios Solve the optimization problem for each Monte- Carlo scenario Resampling allocation computed as the average of all obtained allocations. 3/10/2010 3

  4. Performance 3/10/2010 4

  5. Performance 3/10/2010 5

  6. Weight Descriptors – Lowest Weight 3/10/2010 6

  7. Weight Descriptors – Highest Weight 3/10/2010 7

  8. Rate of Returns on Investments • Average annual arithmetic return • No reinvesting, i.e. start each year with the same amount of money where • Average annual geometric return • Time weighted • With reinvesting

  9. Return Analysis • New features for return analysis in software • Average annual return (both geometric and arithmetic) • Plot of annual return • Histogram of monthly return with Gaussian fit

  10. Compare to S&P 500 • Compared the returns of all 16 estimators (for both unconstrained and 20% constrained cases) and S&P 500 • The comparison was incomplete when it was presented two weeks ago • Downloaded the S&P 500 data from CRSP • Added an option for S&P 500 comparison in the software • Value-Weighted Return • Equal-Weighted Return

  11. Annual Return Plots

  12. Histogram of Returns • Typical returns have heavier tails than a Gaussian distribution • Gaussian fit

  13. Average Annual Geometric Return

  14. Analysis • Return of identity matrix ≈ S&P 500 Equal-weighted return • Problems • 20% constrained results are much lower than 20% • Most importantly, 20% constrained results are lower than the unconstrained cases • Possible reasons for the error • q = 0.0153 is wrong • Not on efficient frontier • Most likely: Models based on previous data applying to future data. Bad predictor of future expected returns μ "For expected returns, we just take the average realized return over the last 10 years. This may or may not be a good predictor of future expected returns, but our goal is not to predict expected returns: it is only to show what kind of reduction in out-of-sample variance our method yields under a fairly reasonable linear constraint."

  15. Sample Output Text File

  16. Standard error Method 1: Assuming returns to be iidgaussian Method 2: Get N bootstrap samples for monthly returns assuming uniform distribution Method 3: Get N bootstrap samples for monthly log-returns assuming log-normal distribution Bootstrap results are stable for N=1000

  17. Standard error- Conclusion • Bootstrap technique confirmed our earlier belief that the standard errors presented in the paper are monthly. • Though we agree it makes more sense to present annualized standard errors when standard deviations are annualized. • 2. Our monthly SE results for uniform distribution bootstrap closely match with Ledoit’s (even for Identity and Psuedo-inverse estimators).

  18. Results:

  19. Results:

  20. Results:

  21. Results:

  22. Project goals and achievements • Ledoit and Wolf [2002] • Implemented 8 estimators including ‘Shrinkage to market’ • Results for standard deviation closely match those in the paper. • Fixed calculations for constrained portfolio • Solved standard error calculation puzzle • Added functionality for Return Analysis • Weight Analysis

  23. Project goals and achievements • Benninga & Disatnik [2002] • Implemented 8 estimators including ‘two block estimator’ • Ran simulations for different time periods • Results for standard deviation closely match those in the paper.

  24. Future work: • Matlab code documentation and cleaning • Project report • Any further analysis Prof. Pollak suggests

More Related