Solving dynamic portfolio choice problems by recursing on optimized portfolio weights or on the value function?
AbstractMost dynamic programming methods deployed in the portfolio choice literature involve recursions on an approximated value function. The simulation-based method proposed recently by Brandt, Goyal, Santa-Clara, and Stroud (Review of Financial Studies, 18, 831–873, 2005), relies instead on recursive uses of approximated optimal portfolio weights. We examine the relative numerical performance of these two approaches. We show that when portfolio weights are constrained by short sale restrictions for example, iterating on optimized portfolio weights leads to superior results. Value function iterations result in a lower variance but disproportionately higher bias of the solution, especially when risk aversion is high and the investment horizon is long. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoArticle provided by Society for Computational Economics in its journal Computational Economics.
Volume (Year): 29 (2007)
Issue (Month): 3 (May)
Dynamic portfolio choice; Simulation method;
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Michael W. Brandt & Amit Goyal & Pedro Santa-Clara & Jonathan Storud, 2004.
"A Simulation Approach to Dynamic Portfolio Choice with an Application to Learning About Return Predictability,"
NBER Working Papers
10934, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Michael W. Brandt & Amit Goyal & Pedro Santa-Clara & Jonathan R. Stroud, 2005. "A Simulation Approach to Dynamic Portfolio Choice with an Application to Learning About Return Predictability," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 18(3), pages 831-873.
- Balduzzi, Pierluigi & Lynch, Anthony W., 1999. "Transaction costs and predictability: some utility cost calculations," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 52(1), pages 47-78, April.
- Cochrane, John H, 1989.
"The Sensitivity of Tests of the Intertemporal Allocation of Consumption to Near-Rational Alternatives,"
American Economic Review,
American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 319-37, June.
- John H. Cochrane, 1989. "The Sensitivity of Tests of the Intertemporal Allocation of Consumption to Near-Rational Alternatives," NBER Working Papers 2730, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Nicholas Barberis, 2000. "Investing for the Long Run when Returns Are Predictable," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(1), pages 225-264, 02.
- Dammon, Robert M & Spatt, Chester S & Zhang, Harold H, 2001. "Optimal Consumption and Investment with Capital Gains Taxes," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(3), pages 583-616.
- Taras Bodnar & Nestor Parolya & Wolfgang Schmid, 2012. "A Closed-Form Solution of the Multi-Period Portfolio Choice Problem for a Quadratic Utility Function," Papers 1207.1003, arXiv.org.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Guenther Eichhorn) or (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.