IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1109.2945.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Portfolio Optimization under Convex Incentive Schemes

Author

Listed:
  • Maxim Bichuch
  • Stephan Sturm

Abstract

We consider the terminal wealth utility maximization problem from the point of view of a portfolio manager who is paid by an incentive scheme, which is given as a convex function $g$ of the terminal wealth. The manager's own utility function $U$ is assumed to be smooth and strictly concave, however the resulting utility function $U \circ g$ fails to be concave. As a consequence, the problem considered here does not fit into the classical portfolio optimization theory. Using duality theory, we prove wealth-independent existence and uniqueness of the optimal portfolio in general (incomplete) semimartingale markets as long as the unique optimizer of the dual problem has a continuous law. In many cases, this existence and uniqueness result is independent of the incentive scheme and depends only on the structure of the set of equivalent local martingale measures. As examples, we discuss (complete) one-dimensional models as well as (incomplete) lognormal mixture and popular stochastic volatility models. We also provide a detailed analysis of the case where the unique optimizer of the dual problem does not have a continuous law, leading to optimization problems whose solvability by duality methods depends on the initial wealth of the investor.

Suggested Citation

  • Maxim Bichuch & Stephan Sturm, 2011. "Portfolio Optimization under Convex Incentive Schemes," Papers 1109.2945, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2013.
  • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1109.2945
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1109.2945
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Frank Seifried, 2010. "Optimal investment with deferred capital gains taxes," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 71(1), pages 181-199, February.
    2. B. Bouchard & N. Touzi & A. Zeghal, 2004. "Dual formulation of the utility maximization problem: the case of nonsmooth utility," Papers math/0405290, arXiv.org.
    3. Jennifer N. Carpenter, 2000. "Does Option Compensation Increase Managerial Risk Appetite?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(5), pages 2311-2331, October.
    4. Merton, Robert C., 1971. "Optimum consumption and portfolio rules in a continuous-time model," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 373-413, December.
    5. Kasper Larsen, 2005. "Optimal portfolio delegation when parties have different coefficients of risk aversion," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 5(5), pages 503-512.
    6. Peter Carr & Jian Sun, 2007. "A new approach for option pricing under stochastic volatility," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 87-150, May.
    7. Stephen A. Ross, 2004. "Compensation, Incentives, and the Duality of Risk Aversion and Riskiness," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(1), pages 207-225, February.
    8. Stanley R. Pliska, 1986. "A Stochastic Calculus Model of Continuous Trading: Optimal Portfolios," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 11(2), pages 371-382, May.
    9. Griselda Deelstra & Huyên Pham & Nizar Touzi, 2001. "Dual formulation of the utility maximisation problem under transaction costs," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/7596, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    10. repec:dau:papers:123456789/1531 is not listed on IDEAS
    11. Westray, Nicholas & Zheng, Harry, 2009. "Constrained nonsmooth utility maximization without quadratic inf convolution," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 119(5), pages 1561-1579, May.
    12. Stavros Panageas & Mark M. Westerfield, 2009. "High‐Water Marks: High Risk Appetites? Convex Compensation, Long Horizons, and Portfolio Choice," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(1), pages 1-36, February.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Paolo Guasoni & Johannes Muhle-Karbe & Hao Xing, 2013. "Robust Portfolios and Weak Incentives in Long-Run Investments," Papers 1306.2751, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2014.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maxim Bichuch & Stephan Sturm, 2014. "Portfolio optimization under convex incentive schemes," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 873-915, October.
    2. Frank Seifried, 2010. "Optimal investment with deferred capital gains taxes," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 71(1), pages 181-199, February.
    3. Chen, An & Hieber, Peter & Nguyen, Thai, 2019. "Constrained non-concave utility maximization: An application to life insurance contracts with guarantees," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 273(3), pages 1119-1135.
    4. Marcos Escobar-Anel & Michel Kschonnek & Rudi Zagst, 2022. "Portfolio optimization: not necessarily concave utility and constraints on wealth and allocation," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 95(1), pages 101-140, February.
    5. Christian Dehm & Thai Nguyen & Mitja Stadje, 2020. "Non-concave expected utility optimization with uncertain time horizon," Papers 2005.13831, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2021.
    6. Thai Nguyen & Mitja Stadje, 2018. "Optimal investment for participating insurance contracts under VaR-Regulation," Papers 1805.09068, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2019.
    7. Paolo Guasoni & Jan Obłój, 2016. "The Incentives Of Hedge Fund Fees And High-Water Marks," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(2), pages 269-295, April.
    8. Murray Carlson & Ali Lazrak, 2006. "Leverage Choice and Credit Spread Dynamics when Managers Risk Shift," 2006 Meeting Papers 193, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    9. Buchner, Axel & Wagner, Niklas F., 2017. "Rewarding risk-taking or skill? The case of private equity fund managers," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C), pages 14-32.
    10. Ewald, Christian-Oliver & Zhang, Hai, 2016. "Hedge fund seeding via fees-for-seed swaps under idiosyncratic risk," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 45-59.
    11. Nicholas Westray & Harry Zheng, 2010. "Constrained NonSmooth Utility Maximization on the Positive Real Line," Papers 1010.4055, arXiv.org.
    12. Guasoni, Paolo & Muhle-Karbe, Johannes & Xing, Hao, 2017. "Robust portfolios and weak incentives in long-run investments," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 60577, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Igor Makarov & Guillaume Plantin, 2015. "Rewarding Trading Skills Without Inducing Gambling," Sciences Po publications info:hdl:2441/2lk3hracjf8, Sciences Po.
    14. Sheng, Jiliang & Wang, Jian & Wang, Xiaoting & Yang, Jun, 2014. "Asymmetric contracts, cash flows and risk taking of mutual funds," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 38(C), pages 435-442.
    15. Castaneda, Pablo, 2005. "Portfolio Choice and Benchmarking: The Case of the Unemployment Insurance Fund in Chile," MPRA Paper 3346, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 30 Dec 2006.
    16. Zongxia Liang & Yang Liu & Litian Zhang, 2021. "A Framework of State-dependent Utility Optimization with General Benchmarks," Papers 2101.06675, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2023.
    17. Alain Bensoussan & Abel Cadenillas & Hyeng Keun Koo, 2015. "Entrepreneurial Decisions on Effort and Project with a Nonconcave Objective Function," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(4), pages 902-914, October.
    18. repec:hal:spmain:info:hdl:2441/2lk3hracjf8vip44o7neiujmv7 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Paolo Guasoni & Gu Wang, 2015. "Hedge and mutual funds’ fees and the separation of private investments," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 473-507, July.
    20. Paolo Guasoni & Johannes Muhle-Karbe & Hao Xing, 2013. "Robust Portfolios and Weak Incentives in Long-Run Investments," Papers 1306.2751, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2014.
    21. Lan, Yingcong & Wang, Neng & Yang, Jinqiang, 2013. "The economics of hedge funds," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 300-323.

    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:arx:papers:1109.2945. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic 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.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.