商品期货市场中的最优分散投资与天真分散投资

IF 1.8 4区 经济学 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Max Heide, Benjamin R. Auer, Frank Schuhmacher
{"title":"商品期货市场中的最优分散投资与天真分散投资","authors":"Max Heide,&nbsp;Benjamin R. Auer,&nbsp;Frank Schuhmacher","doi":"10.1002/fut.22550","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n <p>Motivated by the ongoing debate on whether optimal or naive diversification should be preferred when distributing wealth across investment alternatives, this article investigates how the choice of covariance estimator affects mean-variance portfolio selection. In an environment tailored to ideal tradability, we construct optimal commodity futures portfolios based on 12 promising covariance matrix estimators and compare their out-of-sample investment performance to a simple, equally weighted investment strategy by means of bootstrap testing. We find that neither the naive allocation approach nor the advanced covariance estimators can outperform the traditional sample covariance matrix. Because this empirical result is robust to modifications of the research design (including alternative investigation periods, data frequencies, estimation window sizes, holding period lengths, weight constraint specifications, and transaction cost levels), it opposes the recurrent suggestion of the equity-oriented literature that the sample covariance matrix should not be used for the purpose of portfolio optimization.</p>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15863,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Futures Markets","volume":"45 1","pages":"3-22"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Optimal Versus Naive Diversification in Commodity Futures Markets\",\"authors\":\"Max Heide,&nbsp;Benjamin R. Auer,&nbsp;Frank Schuhmacher\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/fut.22550\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n <p>Motivated by the ongoing debate on whether optimal or naive diversification should be preferred when distributing wealth across investment alternatives, this article investigates how the choice of covariance estimator affects mean-variance portfolio selection. In an environment tailored to ideal tradability, we construct optimal commodity futures portfolios based on 12 promising covariance matrix estimators and compare their out-of-sample investment performance to a simple, equally weighted investment strategy by means of bootstrap testing. We find that neither the naive allocation approach nor the advanced covariance estimators can outperform the traditional sample covariance matrix. Because this empirical result is robust to modifications of the research design (including alternative investigation periods, data frequencies, estimation window sizes, holding period lengths, weight constraint specifications, and transaction cost levels), it opposes the recurrent suggestion of the equity-oriented literature that the sample covariance matrix should not be used for the purpose of portfolio optimization.</p>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15863,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Futures Markets\",\"volume\":\"45 1\",\"pages\":\"3-22\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Futures Markets\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fut.22550\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Futures Markets","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fut.22550","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","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

本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Optimal Versus Naive Diversification in Commodity Futures Markets

Motivated by the ongoing debate on whether optimal or naive diversification should be preferred when distributing wealth across investment alternatives, this article investigates how the choice of covariance estimator affects mean-variance portfolio selection. In an environment tailored to ideal tradability, we construct optimal commodity futures portfolios based on 12 promising covariance matrix estimators and compare their out-of-sample investment performance to a simple, equally weighted investment strategy by means of bootstrap testing. We find that neither the naive allocation approach nor the advanced covariance estimators can outperform the traditional sample covariance matrix. Because this empirical result is robust to modifications of the research design (including alternative investigation periods, data frequencies, estimation window sizes, holding period lengths, weight constraint specifications, and transaction cost levels), it opposes the recurrent suggestion of the equity-oriented literature that the sample covariance matrix should not be used for the purpose of portfolio optimization.

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
Journal of Futures Markets
Journal of Futures Markets BUSINESS, FINANCE-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
15.80%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: The Journal of Futures Markets chronicles the latest developments in financial futures and derivatives. It publishes timely, innovative articles written by leading finance academics and professionals. Coverage ranges from the highly practical to theoretical topics that include futures, derivatives, risk management and control, financial engineering, new financial instruments, hedging strategies, analysis of trading systems, legal, accounting, and regulatory issues, and portfolio optimization. This publication contains the very latest research from the top experts.
×
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