IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1603.06050.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Tukey's transformational ladder for portfolio management

Author

Listed:
  • Philip Ernst
  • James Thompson
  • Yinsen Miao

Abstract

Over the past half-century, the empirical finance community has produced vast literature on the advantages of the equally weighted S\&P 500 portfolio as well as the often overlooked disadvantages of the market capitalization weighted Standard and Poor's (S\&P 500) portfolio (see \cite{Bloom}, \cite{Uppal}, \cite{Jacobs}, \cite{Treynor}). However, portfolio allocation based on Tukey's transformational ladde have, rather surprisingly, remained absent from the literature. In this work, we consider the S\&P 500 portfolio over the 1958-2015 time horizon weighted by Tukey's transformational ladder (\cite{Tukey2}): $1/x^2,\,\, 1/x,\,\, 1/\sqrt{x},\,\, \text{log}(x),\,\, \sqrt{x},\,\, x,\,\, \text{and} \,\, x^2$, where $x$ is defined as the market capitalization weighted S\&P 500 portfolio. Accounting for dividends and transaction fees, we find that the 1/$x^2$ weighting strategy produces cumulative returns that significantly dominates all other portfolios, achieving a compound annual growth rate of 18\% over the 1958-2015 horizon. Our story is furthered by a startling phenomenon: both the cumulative and annual returns of the $1/x^2$ weighting strategy are superior to those of the $1/x$ weighting strategy, which are in turn superior to those of the 1/$\sqrt{x}$ weighted portfolio, and so forth, ending with the $x^2$ transformation, whose cumulative returns are the lowest of the seven transformations of Tukey's transformational ladder. The order of cumulative returns precisely follows that of Tukey's transformational ladder. To the best of our knowledge, we are the first to discover this phenomenon.

Suggested Citation

  • Philip Ernst & James Thompson & Yinsen Miao, 2016. "Tukey's transformational ladder for portfolio management," Papers 1603.06050, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2017.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1603.06050
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1603.06050
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Philip Ernst & James Thompson & Yinsen Miao, 2016. "Portfolio Selection: The Power of Equal Weight," Papers 1602.00782, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2017.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Henryk Gzyl & Alfredo Rios, 2018. "Which portfolio is better? A discussion of several possible comparison criteria," Papers 1805.06345, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2022.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1603.06050. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.