Which portfolio is better? A discussion of several possible comparison criteria
Henryk Gzyl () and
Papers from arXiv.org
During the last few years, there has been an interest in comparing simple or heuristic procedures for portfolio selection, such as the naive, equal weights, portfolio choice, against more "sophisticated" portfolio choices, and in explaining why, in some cases, the heuristic choice seems to outperform the sophisticated choice. We believe that some of these results may be due to the comparison criterion used. It is the purpose of this note to analyze some ways of comparing the performance of portfolios. We begin by analyzing each criterion proposed on the market line, in which there is only one random return. Several possible comparisons between optimal portfolios and the naive portfolio are possible and easy to establish. Afterwards, we study the case in which there is no risk free asset. In this way, we believe some basic theoretical questions regarding why some portfolios may seem to outperform others can be clarified.
New Economics Papers: this item is included in nep-rmg
Date: 2018-05, Revised 2018-10
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: Track citations by RSS feed
Downloads: (external link)
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1805.06345 Latest version (application/pdf)
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.
Export reference: BibTeX
RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan)
Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:arx:papers:1805.06345
Access Statistics for this paper
More papers in Papers from arXiv.org
Bibliographic data for series maintained by arXiv administrators ().