scholarly journals Improved Covariance Matrix Estimation for Portfolio Risk Measurement: A Review

2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 48 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ruili Sun ◽  
Tiefeng Ma ◽  
Shuangzhe Liu ◽  
Milind Sathye

The literature on portfolio selection and risk measurement has considerably advanced in recent years. The aim of the present paper is to trace the development of the literature and identify areas that require further research. This paper provides a literature review of the characteristics of financial data, commonly used models of portfolio selection, and portfolio risk measurement. In the summary of the characteristics of financial data, we summarize the literature on fat tail and dependence characteristic of financial data. In the portfolio selection model part, we cover three models: mean-variance model, global minimum variance (GMV) model and factor model. In the portfolio risk measurement part, we first classify risk measurement methods into two categories: moment-based risk measurement and moment-based and quantile-based risk measurement. Moment-based risk measurement includes time-varying covariance matrix and shrinkage estimation, while moment-based and quantile-based risk measurement includes semi-variance, VaR and CVaR.

2015 ◽  
Vol 50 (6) ◽  
pp. 1415-1441 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shingo Goto ◽  
Yan Xu

AbstractIn portfolio risk minimization, the inverse covariance matrix prescribes the hedge trades in which a stock is hedged by all the other stocks in the portfolio. In practice with finite samples, however, multicollinearity makes the hedge trades too unstable and unreliable. By shrinking trade sizes and reducing the number of stocks in each hedge trade, we propose a “sparse” estimator of the inverse covariance matrix. Comparing favorably with other methods (equal weighting, shrunk covariance matrix, industry factor model, nonnegativity constraints), a portfolio formed on the proposed estimator achieves significant out-of-sample risk reduction and improves certainty equivalent returns after transaction costs.


Author(s):  
Jean-François Laplante ◽  
Jean Desrochers ◽  
Jacques Préfontaine,

This study pertains to forecasting portfolio risk using a GARCH (Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity) approach. Three models are compared to the GARCH model (1,1) i.e., random walk (RW), historical mean (HMM) and J.P. Morgans exponentially weighted moving average (EWMA). In recent years, many volatility forecasting models have been presented in the financial literature. Using the historical average of stock returns to determine the optimal portfolio is current practice in academic circles. However, we doubt the ability of this method to provide the best estimated portfolio variance. Moreover, an error in the estimated covariance matrix could result in a completely different portfolio mix. Consequently, we believe it would be relevant to examine the volatility forecasting model proposed in different studies to estimate the standard deviation of an efficient portfolio. With a view to building an efficient portfolio in an international context, we will analyze the forecasting models mentioned above. The purpose of this research is to determine whether a GARCH approach to forecasting the covariance matrix makes it possible to obtain a risk that most resembles the actual observed risk for a given return than the model traditionally used by practitioners and academic researchers. To this end, we selected six international stock indices. The study was conducted in a Canadian context and consequently, each stock index is converted into Canadian dollars. Initially, we estimate the covariance matrix for each forecasting model mentioned above. Then, we determine the proportions to invest in the portfolio and calculate the standard deviation of a minimum variance portfolio. Finally, the best model is selected based on the variances between estimated and actual risk by minimizing the root mean squared error (RMSE) for each forecasting model. Our results show that the GARCH (1,1) model is good for estimating risk in a minimum variance portfolio. As well, we find that it is statistically impossible to make a distinction between the accuracy of this model and the RW model. Lastly, our results show that based on the four statistical error measures used, the HMM is the least accurate for estimating portfolio risk. We therefore decided not to use this model and to rely instead on the GARCH approach or the RW, the simplest of all the models.


2015 ◽  
Vol 13 (3) ◽  
pp. 504
Author(s):  
Paulo Ferreira Naibert ◽  
João Caldeira

In this paper, we study the problem of minimum variance portfolio selection based on a recent methodology for portfolio optimization restricting the allocation vector proposed by Fan et al. (2012). To achieve this, we consider different conditional and unconditional covariance matrix estimators. The main contribution of this paper is one of empirical nature for the brazilian stock market. We evaluate out of sample performance indexes of the portfolios constructed for a set of 61 different stocks traded in the São Paulo stock exchange (BM&FBovespa). The results show that the restrictions on the norms of the allocation vector generate substantial gains in relation to the no short-sale portfolio, increasing the average risk-adjusted return (larger Sharpe Ratio) and lowering the portfolio turnover.


2019 ◽  
Vol 55 (8) ◽  
pp. 2700-2731
Author(s):  
Fangquan Shi ◽  
Lianjie Shu ◽  
Aijun Yang ◽  
Fangyi He

In portfolio risk minimization, the inverse covariance matrix of returns is often unknown and has to be estimated in practice. Yet the eigenvalues of the sample covariance matrix are often overdispersed, leading to severe estimation errors in the inverse covariance matrix. To deal with this problem, we propose a general framework by shrinking the sample eigenvalues based on the Schatten norm. The proposed framework has the advantage of being computationally efficient as well as structure-free. The comparative studies show that our approach behaves reasonably well in terms of reducing out-of-sample portfolio risk and turnover.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document