Portfolio Optimization with CVaR under VG Process

Subject Areas : Financial Knowledge of Securities Analysis

Mostafa Heidari Haratmeh ¹

1 - Faculty of Islamic Azad University, Naragh Branch, Naragh, Iran.

Received: 2017-05-20 Accepted : 2017-09-06 Published : 2019-03-21

Keywords: Portfolio , CVaR , Variance Gamma, Copula, Monte Carlo,

Abstract :

Formal portfolio optimization methodologies describe the dynamics of financial instruments price with Gaussian Copula (GC). Regardless of the skewness and kurtosis of assets return rate, optimization with GC underestimates the optimal CVaR of portfolio. In the present paper, we develop an approach to portfolio optimization by introducing Lévy processes. It focuses on describing the dynamics of assets’ log price with Variance Gamma copula (VGC) rather than GC. Doing a case study on three Indexes of Iran Stock Market, the best hedge positions of Total Index, Market Index and Industry Index with the performance function CVaR under VG model were calculated. The results indicate that (a) VG copula can efficiently overcome the shortcomings of Gaussian copula which underestimates the CVaR of portfolio; (b) optimal portfolio, VaR and CVaR keep stable each time one parameter of sample’s skewness or kurtosis was changed, but the optimal portfolio change significantly when the sample’s mean increases or decreases; (c) different copula lead to different optimal CVaR; and (d) fat-tailedness and kurtosis are extremely important in portfolio optimization framework.

References:

*      Acerbi, C., Simonetti, P., 2002. Portfolio Optimization with Spectral. Measures of Risk. Working paper. http://www.gloriamundi.org.

*      Acerbi, C., Tasche, D., 2002. On the coherence of expected shortfall. J. Bank. Financ. 26 (7), 1487–1503.

*      Acerbi, C., Nordio, C., Sirtori, C., 2001. Expected shortfall as a tool for financial risk management. Working paper.http://www.gloriamundi.org.

*      Alexander, S., Coleman, T.F., Li, Y., 2003. Derivative portfolio hedging based on CVaR. In: Szego, G. (Ed.), Risk Measures for the 21st Century. Wiley, London, pp. 339–363.

*      Alexander, S., Coleman, T.F., Li, Y., 2006. Minimizing CVaR and VaR for a portfolio of derivatives. J. Bank. Financ. 30, 583–605.

*      Andersson, F., Mausser, H., Rosen, D., Uryasev, S., 1999. Credit risk optimization with conditional Value-at-Risk. Mathematical Programming B.

*      Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Ebner, J.-M., Heath, D., 1999. Coherent measures of risk. Math. Financ. 9 (3), 203–228.

*      Cariboni, J., Schoutens,W., 2004. Pricing credit default swaps under Lévy models. UCS Report 2004-07, K.U. Leuven.

*      Chekhlov, A., Uryasev, S.P., Zabarankin, M., April 8, 2000. Portfolio optimization with drawdown constraints. Research Report #2000-5. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=223323.

*      Dai, M., Yi, F., January 2006. Finite-horizon optimal investment with transaction costs: a parabolic double obstacle problem. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=868499.

*      Davis, M.H.A., Norman, A.R., 1990. Portfolio selection with transaction costs. Math. Oper. Res. 15, 676–713.

*      Fama, E.F., 1965. The behavior of stock market prices. J. Bus. 38, 34–105.

*      Follmer, H., Shied, A., 2002. Convex measures of risk and trading constraints. Financ. Stochast. 6 (4), 429–447.

*      Hull, J., White, A., 2004. Valuation of a CDO and an nth to default CDS without Monte Carlo simulation. J. Deriv. 12, 8–23.

*      Liu, H., Loewenstein, M., 2002. Optimal portfolio selection with transaction costs and finite horizons. Rev. Financ. Stud. 15 (3), 805–835.

*      Madan, D.B., Seneta, E., 1990. The variance gamma (V.G.) model for share market returns. J. Bus. 63, 511–524.

*      Madan, D.B., Carr, P.P., Chang, Eric C., 1998. The variance gamma process and option pricing. Eur. Financ. Rev. 2, 79–105.

*      Magill, M.J.P., Constantinides, G.M., 1976. Portfolio selection with transaction costs. J. Econ. Theory 13, 264–271.

*      McNeil, A.J., Frey, R., Embrechts, P., 2005. Quantitative Risk Management: Concepts, Techniques, Tools. Princeton University press.

*      Merton, R.C., 1969. Lifetime portfolio selection under uncertainty: the continuous-time case. Rev. Econ. Stat. 51 (2), 247–257.

*      Merton, R.C., 1971. Optimal consumption and portfolio rules in a continuous time model. J. Econ. Theory 3, 373–413.

*      Pflug, G., 2000. Some remarks on the Value-at-Risk and the Conditional Value-at-Risk. In: Uryasev, S. (Ed.), Probabilistic ConstrainedOptimization: Methodology and Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers. Rockafellar, R.T., Uryasev, S., 2000. Optimization of conditional Value-at-Risk. J. Risk 2, 21–41.

*      Rockafellar, R.T., Uryasev, S., 2001. Conditional Value-at-Risk for general loss distributions. Research Report 2001–5. ISE Department, University of Florida. http://www.ise.ufl.edu/uryasev/cvar2.pdf.

*      Rockafellar, R.T., Uryasev, S., 2002. Conditional Value-at-Risk for general loss distributions. J. Bank. Financ. 26 (7), 1443–1471.

*      Rockafellar, R.T., Uryasev, S., Zabarankin, M., 2006. Generalized deviation measures in risk analysis. Financ. Stocast. 10, 51–74.

 

*      Shreve, S.E., Soner, H.M., 1994. Optimal investment and consumption with transaction costs. Ann. Appl. Probab. 4 (3), 609–692.

*      Chao Sun, Jing-Yang Yang, Sheng-Hong, Li., 2007. On reset option pricing in binomial market with both fixed and proportional transaction costs. Appl. Math. Comput. 193 (1), 143–153