EconPapers    
Economics at your fingertips  
 

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MEAN-VARIANCE AND MEAN-CVAR PORTFOLIO OPTIMIZATION MODELS

Panna Miskolczi ()
Additional contact information
Panna Miskolczi: University of Debrecen Faculty of Economics and Business

Annals of Faculty of Economics, 2016, vol. 1, issue 1, 548-557

Abstract: Everybody heard already that one should not expect high returns without high risk, or one should not expect safety without low returns. The goal of portfolio theory is to find the balance between maximizing the return and minimizing the risk. To do so we have to first understand and measure the risk. Naturally a good risk measure has to satisfy several properties - in theory and in practise. Markowitz suggested to use the variance as a risk measure in portfolio theory. This led to the so called mean-variance model - for which Markowitz received the Nobel Prize in 1990. The model has been criticized because it is well suited for elliptical distributions but it may lead to incorrect conclusions in the case of non-elliptical distributions. Since then many risk measures have been introduced, of which the Value at Risk (VaR) is the most widely used in the recent years. Despite of the widespread use of the Value at Risk there are some fundamental problems with it. It does not satisfy the subadditivity property and it ignores the severity of losses in the far tail of the profit-and-loss (P&L) distribution. Moreover, its non-convexity makes VaR impossible to use in optimization problems. To come over these issues the Expected Shortfall (ES) as a coherent risk measure was developed. Expected Shortfall is also called Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR). Compared to Value at Risk, ES is more sensitive to the tail behaviour of the P&L distribution function. In the first part of the paper I state the definition of these three risk measures. In the second part I deal with my main question: What is happening if we replace the variance with the Expected Shortfall in the portfolio optimization process. Do we have different optimal portfolios as a solution? And thus, does the solution suggests to decide differently in the two cases? To answer to these questions I analyse seven Hungarian stock exchange companies. First I use the mean-variance portfolio optimization model, and then the mean-CVaR model. The results are shown in several charts and tables.

Keywords: risk; Value at Risk; Expected Shortfall; Mean-Variance Portfolio Optimization; Mean-CVaR Portfolio Optimization (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: G11 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
http://anale.steconomiceuoradea.ro/volume/2016/n1/53.pdf (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2016:i:1:p:548-557

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Annals of Faculty of Economics from University of Oradea, Faculty of Economics Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catalin ZMOLE ( this e-mail address is bad, please contact ).

 
Page updated 2025-03-19
Handle: RePEc:ora:journl:v:1:y:2016:i:1:p:548-557