A strategy-proof test of portfolio returns
Traditional methods for analyzing portfolio returns often rely on multifactor risk assessment, and tests of significance are typically based on variants of the t-test. This approach has serious limitations when analyzing the returns from dynamically traded portfolios that include derivative positions, because standard tests of significance can be 'gamed' using options trading strategies. To deal with this problem we propose a test that assumes nothing about the structure of returns except that they form a martingale difference. Although the test is conservative and corrects for unrealized tail risk, the loss in power is small at high levels of significance.
(This abstract was borrowed from another version of this item.)
Volume (Year): 12 (2012)
Issue (Month): 5 (March)
|Contact details of provider:|| Web page: http://www.tandfonline.com/RQUF20|
|Order Information:||Web: http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/RQUF20|
References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dean P. Foster & H. Peyton Young, 2010. "Gaming Performance Fees By Portfolio Managers," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1435-1458.
When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:quantf:v:12:y:2012:i:5:p:671-683. 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: (Michael McNulty)
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.