Nothing Special   »   [go: up one dir, main page]
Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Efficiency evaluation of fuzzy portfolio in different risk measures via DEA

  • RAOTA-2016
  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this paper, we discuss the fuzzy portfolio efficiency evaluation problem in different risk measures. Real frontier approach (RFA) is often used in portfolio performance assessment. However, the computation complexity and the real trading solution make it hard to achieve in practice. In this work, we first present three kinds of DEA (Data envelopment analysis) based fuzzy portfolio estimation models in different risk measures, i.e., possibilistic variance, possibilistic semi-variance, and possibilistic semi-absolute deviation, to evaluate the portfolio efficiency (PE). Furthermore, we carry out large amount of simulations with different sample sizes to compare our proposed models with RFA. All results demonstrate that with adequate sample size, the envelop frontier generated by our models can approximate the real effective portfolio frontier, and PE obtained by these two methods are highly related.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18
Fig. 19

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Banker, R. D., Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1984). Some models for estimating technical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis. Management Science, 30, 1078–1092.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Branda, M., & Kopa, M. (2016). DEA models equivalent to general Nth order stochastic dominance efficiency tests. Operations Research Letters, 44, 285–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvo, C., Ivorra, C., & Liern, W. (2016). Fuzzy portfolio selection with non-financial goals: Exploring the efficient frontier. Annals of Opearation Reaseach, 245, 31–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, C., & Fullér, R. (2001). On possibilistic mean value and variance of fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 122, 325–326.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, C., Fullér, R., & Majlender, P. (2002). A possibilistic approach to selecting portfolios with highest utility score. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 131, 13–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., Cooper, W. W., & Rhodes, E. (1978). Measuring the efficiency of decision making units. European Journal of Operational Research, 2, 429–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W. (2009). Two possibilistic mean–variance models for portfolio selection. Fuzzy Information and Engerneering, 2, 1035–1044.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W. (2015). Artificial bee colony algorithm for constrained possibilistic portfolio optimization problem. Physica A, 429, 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, G., Liao, X., & Wang, S. (2009). A cutting plane algorithm for MV portfolio selection model. Applied Mathematics and Computation, 215, 1456–1462.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, W., Wang, Y., & Mehlawat, M. K. (2016). A hybrid FA-SA algorithm for fuzzy portfolio selection with transaction costs. Annals of Operations Research. doi:10.1007/s10479-016-2365-3.

  • Ding, H., Zhou, Z. B., Xiao, H., Ma, C., & Liu, W. (2014). Performance evaluation of portfolios with margin requirements. Mathematical Problems in Engineering. doi:10.1155/2014/618706.

  • Edirisinghe, N. C. P., & Zhang, X. (2007). Generalized DEA model of fundamental analysis and its application to portfolio optimization. Journal of Banking Finance, 31, 331–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grootveld, H., & Hallerbach, W. (1999). Variance vs downside risk: Is there really that much difference? European Journal of Operational Research, 114, 304–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huang, X. (2008). Mean-semivariance models for fuzzy portfolio selection. Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics, 217, 1–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (1968). The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945–1964. The Journal of Finance, 23, 389–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joro, T., & Na, P. (2006). Portfolio performance evaluation in a mean-variance-skewness framework. European Journal of Operational Research, 175, 446–461.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konno, H., Shirakawa, H., & Yamazaki, H. (1993). A mean-absolute deviation-skewness portfolio optimization model. Annals of Operations Research, 45, 205–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Konno, H., & Yamazaki, H. (1991). Mean-absolute deviation portfolio optimization model and its applications to Tokyo stock market. Management Science, 37, 519–531.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krzemienowski, A., & Szymczyk, S. (2016). Portfolio optimization with a copula-based extension of conditional value-at-risk. Annals of Operations Research, 237, 219–236.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lim, S., Oh, K. W., & Zhu, J. (2013). Use of DEA cross-efficiency evaluation in portfolio selection: An application to Korean stock market. European Journal of Operational Research, 236, 361–368.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, X., & Qin, Z. (2014). Interval portfolio selection models within the framework of uncertainty theory. Economic Modelling, 41, 338–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y. J., & Zhang, W. G. (2013). Fuzzy portfolio optimization model under real constraints. Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, 53, 704–711.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, Y. J., Zhang, W. G., & Wang, J. B. (2016). Multi-period cardinality constrained portfolio selection models with interval coefficients. Annals of Operations Research, 244, 545–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Liu, W. B., Zhou, Z. B., Liu, D. B., & Xiao, H. L. (2014). Estimation of portfolio efficiency. Omega, 52, 107–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, H. (1952). Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance, 7, 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, H., Todd, P., Xu, G. L., & Yamane, Y. (1993). Computation of mean-semivariance efficient sets by the Critical Line Algorithm. Annals of Operations Research, 45, 307–317.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mashayekhi, Z., & Omrani, H. (2016). An integrated multi-objective Markowitz-DEA cross-efficiency modelwith fuzzy returns for portfolio selection problem. Applied Soft Computing, 38, 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moazeni, S., Coleman, T. F., & Li, Y. (2016). Smoothing and parametric rules for stochastic mean-CVaR optimal execution strategy. Annals of Operations Research, 237, 99–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morey, M. R., & Morey, R. C. (1999). Mutual fund performance appraisals: A multi-horizon perspective with end ogenous bench marking. Omega, 127, 241–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qin, Z. (2015). Mean-variance model for portfolio optimization problem in the simultaneous presence of random and uncertain returns. European Journal of Operational Research, 245, 480–488.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qin, Z., Kar, S., & Zheng, H. (2016). Uncertain portfolio adjusting model using semi-absolution deviation. Soft Computing, 20, 717–725.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roll, R. (1978). Ambiguity when performance is measured by the security market line. The Journal of Finance, 33, 1051–1069.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, D. (1952). Safety-first and the holding of assets. Econometrica, 20, 431–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharpe, W. (1966). Mutual fund performance. The Journal of Business, 39, 119–138.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Speranza, M. G. (1993). Linear programming models for portfolio optimization. The Journal of Finance, 12, 107–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tavana, M., Keramatpour, M., Santos-Arteaga, F. G., & Ghorbaniane, E. (2015). A fuzzy hybrid project portfolio selection method using data envelopment analysis, TOPSIS and integer programming. Expert Systems with Applications, 42, 8432–8444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Treynor, J. (1965). How to rate management investment funds. Harvard Business Review, 44, 131–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vercher, E., & Bermúdez, J. D. (2015). Portfolio optimization using a credibility mean-absolute semi-deviation model. Expert Systems with Applications, 42, 7121–7131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, B., Wang, S., & Watada, J. (2011). Fuzzy portfolio selection models with value-at-risk. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 19, 758–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadeh, L. A. (1965). Fuzzy set. Information and Control, 8, 338–353.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, W. G., & Nie, Z. K. (2003). On possibilistic variance of fuzzy numbers. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 2639, 398–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, S., Lu, Q., Han, L., Yong, L., & Hu, F. (2015). A mean-CVaR-skewness portfolio optimization model based on asymmetric Laplace distribution. Annals of Operations Research, 226, 727–739.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Authors would like to thank the Editor and the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and detailed suggestions that have improved the presentation of this paper. The research of first and second authors is supported by the Humanity and Social Science Youth foundation of Ministry of Education of China (No. 13YJC630012). The second author also acknowledges the support by Graduate Science and Technology Innovation Foundation from the Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing, China. Furthermore, the third author acknowledges the research support through Research and Development and DST PURSE-II grants from University of Delhi, Delhi, India.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Information, Capital University of Economics and Business, Beijing, China

    Wei Chen & Yuxi Gai

  2. Department of Operational Research, University of Delhi, Delhi, India

    Pankaj Gupta

Authors
  1. Wei Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yuxi Gai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pankaj Gupta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Wei Chen.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, W., Gai, Y. & Gupta, P. Efficiency evaluation of fuzzy portfolio in different risk measures via DEA. Ann Oper Res 269, 103–127 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2411-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-017-2411-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation