Generalized Safety First and a New Twist on Portfolio Performance

M. Ryan Haley and Charles Whiteman ()

Econometric Reviews, 2008, vol. 27, issue 4-6, 457-483

Abstract: We propose a Generalization of Roy's (1952) Safety First (SF) principle and relate it to the IID versions of Stutzer's (Stutzer's 2000, 2003) Portfolio Performance Index and underperformance probability Decay-Rate Maximization criteria. Like the original SF, the Generalized Safety First (GSF) rule seeks to minimize an upper bound on the probability of ruin (or shortfall, more generally) in a single drawing from a return distribution. We show that this upper bound coincides with what Stutzer showed will maximize the rate at which the probability of shortfall in the long-run average return shrinks to zero in repeated drawings from the return distribution. Our setup is simple enough that we can illustrate via direct calculation a deep result from Large Deviations theory: in the IID case the GSF probability bound and the decay rate correspond to the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence between the one-shot portfolio distribution and the “closest” mean-shortfall distribution. This enables us to produce examples in which minimizing the upper bound on the underperformance probability does not lead to the same decision as minimizing the underperformance probability itself, and thus that the decay-rate maximizing strategy may require the investor to take positions that do not minimize the probability of shortfall in each successive period. It also makes clear that the relationship between the marginal distribution of the one-period portfolio return and the mean-shortfall distribution is the same as that between the source density and the target density in importance sampling. Thus Geweke's (1989) measure of Relative Numerical Efficiency can be used as a measure of the quality of the divergence measure. Our interpretation of the decay rate maximizing criterion in terms of a one-shot problem enables us to use the tools of importance sampling to develop a “performance index” (standard error) for the Portfolio Performance Index (PPI). It turns out that in a simple stock portfolio example, portfolios within one (divergence) standard error of one another can have very different weights on individual securities.

Keywords: Entropy; Importance sampling; Kullback-Leibler divergence; Portfolio choice; Portfolio performance; Safety first; Shortfall (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2008
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (11)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/07474930801960360 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:emetrv:v:27:y:2008:i:4-6:p:457-483

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/LECR20

DOI: 10.1080/07474930801960360

Access Statistics for this article

Econometric Reviews is currently edited by Dr. Essie Maasoumi

More articles in Econometric Reviews from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by ().