How Inefficient is the 1/N Asset-Allocation Strategy?
AbstractIn this paper, we compare the out-of-sample performance of the rule allocating 1/N to each of the N available assets to several static and dynamic models of optimal asset-allocation for ten datasets. We devote particular attention to models the literature has proposed to account for estimation and model error. We find that the 1/N asset-allocation rule typically has a higher out-of-sample Sharpe ratio, a higher certainty-equivalent return, and a lower turnover than optimal asset allocation policies. The intuition for the poor performance of the policies from the optimizing models is that the gain from optimal diversification relative to naïve diversification under the 1/N rule is typically smaller than the loss arising from having to use as inputs for the optimizing models parameters that are estimated with error rather than known precisely. Simulations show that the performance of optimal strategies relative to the 1/N rule improves with the length of the estimation window, which reduces estimation error. For instance, for the case where wealth can be allocated across four risky assets with an average cross-sectional annual idiosyncratic volatility of 20%, it takes an estimation window of 50 years in order for the classical mean-variance policy implemented using maximum-likelihood estimates of the moments to outperform 1/N. But if the average idiosyncratic volatility drops to 10%, the length of the required estimation window increases to 500 years; and, when the number of assets increases to 100 while average idiosyncratic volatility is 20%, the length of the required estimation window is more than 1,000 years.
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.
As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version under "Related research" (further below) or search for a different version of it.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers in its series CEPR Discussion Papers with number 5142.
Date of creation: Jul 2005
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: Centre for Economic Policy Research, 77 Bastwick Street, London EC1V 3PZ.
Phone: 44 - 20 - 7183 8801
Fax: 44 - 20 - 7183 8820
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2005-08-13 (All new papers)
- NEP-FIN-2005-08-13 (Finance)
- NEP-FMK-2005-08-13 (Financial Markets)
You can help add them by filling out this form.
reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: ().
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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.
If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.