IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/easeco/v35y2009i1p84-95.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is More Always Better? Empirical Evidence on Optimal Portfolio Size

Author

Listed:
  • Alla A Melkumian

    (College of Business and Technology, Western Illinois University, 1 University Circle, Macomb, IL 61455-1390, USA.)

  • Arsen V Melkumian

    (College of Business and Technology, Western Illinois University, 1 University Circle, Macomb, IL 61455-1390, USA.)

Abstract

A restriction on portfolio size results in welfare losses for investors. To measure these welfare losses, we compare n-asset optimal portfolios with 26-asset optimal portfolios using the concept of proportionate opportunity cost. The original historical asset returns data are used with a VAR in generating joint returns distributions for the portfolio formation period. We find that suboptimal diversification imposes substantial costs on investors with low levels of relative risk aversion. Investors with high levels of risk aversion incur very small or no cost at all diversifying sub-optimally. We show that investors with high levels of risk aversion place most of their initial wealth in the safe asset and, therefore, few stocks are needed to achieve optimal diversification. Eastern Economic Journal (2009) 35, 84–95. doi:10.1057/palgrave.eej.9050045

Suggested Citation

  • Alla A Melkumian & Arsen V Melkumian, 2009. "Is More Always Better? Empirical Evidence on Optimal Portfolio Size," Eastern Economic Journal, Palgrave Macmillan;Eastern Economic Association, vol. 35(1), pages 84-95.
    • Handle: RePEc:pal:easeco:v:35:y:2009:i:1:p:84-95
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/eej/journal/v35/n1/pdf/9050045a.pdf
    File Function: Link to full text PDF
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/eej/journal/v35/n1/full/9050045a.html
    File Function: Link to full text HTML
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:pal:easeco:v:35:y:2009:i:1:p:84-95. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.palgrave-journals.com/ .

    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.