IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/cup/jfinqa/v14y1979i02p221-242_00.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An Analytical Comparison of Variance and Semivariance Capital Market Theories

Author

Listed:
  • Nantell, Timothy J.
  • Price, Barbara

Abstract

Most research in modern portfolio theory and capital market theory is based on investor selection of portfolios that are efficient in the sense that they are not dominated by other portfolios in terms of their risk-expected return characteristics. The most widely used measure of portfolio risk is the variance about the mean of the exante distribution of portfolio returns. The theoretical framework from which this measure of risk is usually derived was initially suggested by Markowitz [12], and is by now well known. Although variance has the attention of most researchers, another measure, semivariance, had some early support from Markowitz himself, and from Quirk and Saposnik [17], Mao [10], and others. Semivariance as a measure of risk can be derived from the same theoretical framework as is variance; it requires only a slightly different utility function. The semivariance of returns of portfolio p below some point h is defined aswhere fp (R) represents the probability density function of returns for portfolio p. Semivariance portfolio theory is enjoying something of a revival in the works of Porter [15, 16], Hogan and Warren [6] and Klemkosky [8], and semivariance capital market models have been developed by Hogan and Warren [7] and Greene [5].

Suggested Citation

  • Nantell, Timothy J. & Price, Barbara, 1979. "An Analytical Comparison of Variance and Semivariance Capital Market Theories," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 14(2), pages 221-242, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:cup:jfinqa:v:14:y:1979:i:02:p:221-242_00
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S0022109000005275/type/journal_article
    File Function: link to article abstract page
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Galagedera, Don U.A., 2007. "An alternative perspective on the relationship between downside beta and CAPM beta," Emerging Markets Review, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 4-19, March.
    2. Jose Fernandes & Augusto Hasman & Juan Ignacio Pena, 2007. "Risk premium: insights over the threshold," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 18(1), pages 41-59.
    3. Ruili Sun & Tiefeng Ma & Shuangzhe Liu & Milind Sathye, 2019. "Improved Covariance Matrix Estimation for Portfolio Risk Measurement: A Review," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-34, March.
    4. Zengjing Chen & Larry G. Epstein & Guodong Zhang, 2022. "Approximate optimality and the risk/reward tradeoff in a class of bandit problems," Papers 2210.08077, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    5. Courtney Droms Hatch & Kurt Carlson & William G. Droms, 2018. "Effects of market returns and market volatility on investor risk tolerance," Journal of Financial Services Marketing, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(2), pages 77-90, June.
    6. Asgar Ali & K. N. Badhani, 2023. "Downside risk matters once the lottery effect is controlled: explaining risk–return relationship in the Indian equity market," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 24(1), pages 27-43, February.
    7. Sana Hussain, 2020. "Good volatility vs. bad volatility: The asymmetric impact of financial depth on macroeconomic volatility," Manchester School, University of Manchester, vol. 88(3), pages 405-438, June.
    8. Ping Cheng, 2004. "Asymmetric Risk Measures and Real Estate Returns," The Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 89-102, October.
    9. Cumova, Denisa & Nawrocki, David, 2014. "Portfolio optimization in an upside potential and downside risk framework," Journal of Economics and Business, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 68-89.
    10. Galagedera, Don U.A. & Brooks, Robert D., 2007. "Is co-skewness a better measure of risk in the downside than downside beta?: Evidence in emerging market data," Journal of Multinational Financial Management, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 214-230, July.

    More about this item

    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:cup:jfinqa:v:14:y:1979:i:02:p:221-242_00. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Kirk Stebbing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cambridge.org/jfq .

    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.