IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v50y2004i10p1390-1406.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Efficient Diversification According to Stochastic Dominance Criteria

Author

Listed:
  • Timo Kuosmanen

    () (Environmental Economics and Natural Resources Group, Wageningen University, Hollandseweg 1, 6706 KN Wageningen, The Netherlands)

Abstract

This paper develops the first operational tests of portfolio efficiency based on the general stochastic dominance (SD) criteria that account for an infinite set of diversification strategies. The main insight is to preserve the cross-sectional dependence of asset returns when forming portfolios by reexpressing the SD criteria in T-dimensional Euclidean space, with elements representing rates of return in T different states of nature. We characterize subsets of this state-space that dominate a given evaluated return vector by first- and second-order SD. This allows us to derive simple SD efficiency measures and test statistics, computable by standard mathematical programming algorithms. The SD tests and efficiency measures are illustrated by an empirical application that analyzes industrial diversification of the market portfolio.

Suggested Citation

  • Timo Kuosmanen, 2004. "Efficient Diversification According to Stochastic Dominance Criteria," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(10), pages 1390-1406, October.
  • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:50:y:2004:i:10:p:1390-1406
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1040.0284
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gavish, Bezalel, 1977. "A relaxation algorithm for building undominated portfolios," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 1(2), pages 143-150, October.
    2. Porter, R. Burr & Wart, James R. & Ferguson, Donald L., 1973. "Efficient Algorithms for Conducting Stochastic Dominance Tests on Large Numbers of Portfolios," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 8(01), pages 71-81, January.
    3. Vijay S. Bawa & Eric B. Lindenberg & Lawrence C. Rafsky, 1979. "An Efficient Algorithm to Determine Stochastic Dominance Admissible Sets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 25(7), pages 609-622, July.
    4. James P. Quirk & Rubin Saposnik, 1962. "Admissibility and Measurable Utility Functions," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 29(2), pages 140-146.
    5. Varian, Hal R., 1983. "Nonparametric Tests of Models of Investor Behavior," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 18(03), pages 269-278, September.
    6. Vijay S. Bawa, 1982. "Research Bibliography---Stochastic Dominance: A Research Bibliography," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 28(6), pages 698-712, June.
    7. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Rhodes, E., 1978. "Measuring the efficiency of decision making units," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 2(6), pages 429-444, November.
    8. Hadar, Josef & Russell, William R, 1969. "Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 59(1), pages 25-34, March.
    9. Levy, Haim & Hanoch, Giora, 1970. "Relative Effectiveness of Efficiency Criteria for Portfolio Selection," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 5(01), pages 63-76, March.
    10. Schmeidler, David, 1979. "A bibliographical note on a theorem of Hardy, Littlewood, and Polya," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 125-128, February.
    11. Chris Starmer, 2000. "Developments in Non-expected Utility Theory: The Hunt for a Descriptive Theory of Choice under Risk," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 38(2), pages 332-382, June.
    12. Kroll, Yoram & Levy, Haim, 1980. "Sampling Errors and Portfolio Efficient Analysis," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 15(03), pages 655-688, September.
    13. Frankfurter, George M. & Phillips, Herbert E., 1975. "Efficient Algorithms for Conducting Stochastic Dominance Tests on Large Numbers of Portfolios: A Comment," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(01), pages 177-179, March.
    14. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "Portfolio Selection," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 7(1), pages 77-91, March.
    15. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March.
    16. Peleg, Bezalel & Yaari, M E, 1975. "A Price Characterization of Efficient Random Variables," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 43(2), pages 283-292, March.
    17. Ronny Aboudi & Dominique Thon, 1994. "Efficient Algorithms for Stochastic Dominance Tests Based on Financial Market Data," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 508-515, April.
    18. Haim Levy, 1992. "Stochastic Dominance and Expected Utility: Survey and Analysis," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 38(4), pages 555-593, April.
    19. Rothschild, Michael & Stiglitz, Joseph E., 1970. "Increasing risk: I. A definition," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 2(3), pages 225-243, September.
    20. Charnes, A. & Cooper, W. W. & Golany, B. & Seiford, L. & Stutz, J., 1985. "Foundations of data envelopment analysis for Pareto-Koopmans efficient empirical production functions," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 30(1-2), pages 91-107.
    21. Levy, Haim & Wiener, Zvi, 1998. "Stochastic Dominance and Prospect Dominance with Subjective Weighting Functions," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 147-163, May-June.
    22. Porter, R. Burr & Pfaffenberger, Roger C., 1975. "Efficient Algorithms for Conducting Stochastic Dominance Tests on Large Numbers of Portfolios: Reply," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 10(01), pages 181-185, March.
    23. Ray D. Nelson & Rulon D. Pope, 1991. "Bootstrapped Insights into Empirical Applications of Stochastic Dominance," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 37(9), pages 1182-1194, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:50:y:2004:i:10:p:1390-1406. See general 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: (Mirko Janc). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.