具有环境、社会和公司治理偏好的稳健投资组合优化

IF 2 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Risks Pub Date : 2024-02-05 DOI:10.3390/risks12020033
Marcos Escobar-Anel, Yiyao Jiao
{"title":"具有环境、社会和公司治理偏好的稳健投资组合优化","authors":"Marcos Escobar-Anel, Yiyao Jiao","doi":"10.3390/risks12020033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study addresses the crucial but under-explored topic of ambiguity aversion, i.e., model misspecification, in the area of environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) within portfolio decisions. It considers a risk- and ambiguity-averse investor allocating resources to a risk-free asset, a market index, a green stock, and a brown stock. The study employs a robust control approach rooted in relative entropy to account for model misspecification and derive closed-form optimal investment strategies. The key contribution of this study includes demonstrating, using two sets of empirical data on asset returns and ESG ratings, the substantial influence of ambiguity on optimal trading strategies, particularly highlighting the differential effects of market, green, and brown ambiguities. As a by-product of our analytical solutions, the study contrasts ambiguity-averse investors with their non-ambiguity counterparts, revealing more cautious risk exposures with a reduction in short-selling positions for the former. Furthermore, three types of investors who employ popular suboptimal strategies are identified, together with two loss measures used to quantify their performance. The findings reveal that popular strategies, not accounting for ESG and misspecification in the model, could lead to significant financial costs, with the extent of loss varying depending on those two factors: investors’ ambiguity aversion profiles and ESG preferences.","PeriodicalId":21282,"journal":{"name":"Risks","volume":"12 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Robust Portfolio Optimization with Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Preference\",\"authors\":\"Marcos Escobar-Anel, Yiyao Jiao\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/risks12020033\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study addresses the crucial but under-explored topic of ambiguity aversion, i.e., model misspecification, in the area of environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) within portfolio decisions. It considers a risk- and ambiguity-averse investor allocating resources to a risk-free asset, a market index, a green stock, and a brown stock. The study employs a robust control approach rooted in relative entropy to account for model misspecification and derive closed-form optimal investment strategies. The key contribution of this study includes demonstrating, using two sets of empirical data on asset returns and ESG ratings, the substantial influence of ambiguity on optimal trading strategies, particularly highlighting the differential effects of market, green, and brown ambiguities. As a by-product of our analytical solutions, the study contrasts ambiguity-averse investors with their non-ambiguity counterparts, revealing more cautious risk exposures with a reduction in short-selling positions for the former. Furthermore, three types of investors who employ popular suboptimal strategies are identified, together with two loss measures used to quantify their performance. The findings reveal that popular strategies, not accounting for ESG and misspecification in the model, could lead to significant financial costs, with the extent of loss varying depending on those two factors: investors’ ambiguity aversion profiles and ESG preferences.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21282,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Risks\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Risks\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/risks12020033\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Risks","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/risks12020033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究探讨了投资组合决策中环境、社会和公司治理(ESG)领域的模糊规避(即模型失范)这一至关重要但却未得到充分探讨的课题。该研究考虑了风险和模糊规避投资者将资源分配给无风险资产、市场指数、绿色股票和棕色股票的情况。该研究采用了一种植根于相对熵的稳健控制方法,以考虑模型的不规范性,并推导出封闭形式的最优投资策略。本研究的主要贡献包括:利用两组关于资产回报和环境、社会和公司治理评级的经验数据,证明了模糊性对最优交易策略的重大影响,尤其突出了市场、绿色和棕色模糊性的不同影响。作为我们分析解决方案的副产品,本研究将模糊规避型投资者与非模糊规避型投资者进行了对比,结果显示前者的风险暴露更为谨慎,卖空头寸减少。此外,研究还发现了采用流行次优策略的三类投资者,以及用于量化其表现的两种损失度量。研究结果表明,如果不考虑模型中的环境、社会和公司治理因素和错误规范,流行的策略可能会导致巨大的财务成本,损失程度因投资者的模糊性厌恶特征和环境、社会和公司治理偏好这两个因素而异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Robust Portfolio Optimization with Environmental, Social, and Corporate Governance Preference
This study addresses the crucial but under-explored topic of ambiguity aversion, i.e., model misspecification, in the area of environmental, social, and corporate governance (ESG) within portfolio decisions. It considers a risk- and ambiguity-averse investor allocating resources to a risk-free asset, a market index, a green stock, and a brown stock. The study employs a robust control approach rooted in relative entropy to account for model misspecification and derive closed-form optimal investment strategies. The key contribution of this study includes demonstrating, using two sets of empirical data on asset returns and ESG ratings, the substantial influence of ambiguity on optimal trading strategies, particularly highlighting the differential effects of market, green, and brown ambiguities. As a by-product of our analytical solutions, the study contrasts ambiguity-averse investors with their non-ambiguity counterparts, revealing more cautious risk exposures with a reduction in short-selling positions for the former. Furthermore, three types of investors who employ popular suboptimal strategies are identified, together with two loss measures used to quantify their performance. The findings reveal that popular strategies, not accounting for ESG and misspecification in the model, could lead to significant financial costs, with the extent of loss varying depending on those two factors: investors’ ambiguity aversion profiles and ESG preferences.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Risks
Risks Economics, Econometrics and Finance-Economics, Econometrics and Finance (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
22.70%
发文量
205
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信