IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aop/jijoes/v11y2022i2p92-143.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimal allocation of bank resources and risk reduction through portfolio decentralization

Author

Listed:
  • Arezoo Mohammadi

    (IAU)

  • Mehrzad Minnoei

    (Department of Industrial Management, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University)

  • Zadollah Fathi

    (Department of Industrial Management, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University)

  • Mohamamd Ali Keramati

    (Department of Industrial Management, Central Tehran Branch, Islamic Azad University)

  • Hossein Baktiari

    (5Department of Industrial Management, Faculty of Islamic Studies and Management, Imam Sadegh University, Tehran)

Abstract

The main concern of all economic companies is the resources equipping and allocating them in different economic sectors with the aim of maximizing profit and minimizing risk. Decentralization is one of the important factors that reduce investment risk. The investors plan to create investment by carefully planning and collecting sufficient information on the economic situation and analyzing the situation of various industries. As an economic enterprise, banks are looking for short- and long-term investments in a types of loans ,such as bailment of a capital , civil participation, reward, etc, which guarantees the return of their capital. In this paper, considering the condition of a bank as an economic enterprise, a model is presented which not only increases profit but also reduces risk. Two objective functions have been defined that the first objective is to minimize the risk and the second objective function is to maximize the of the bank profit, which is used by robust programming and Malvi Sim model. In this paper, we have investigated the Risky and non-Risky Partfolio and the optimal portfolio of bank assets from scenario based solution of the model and by using PSO and Genetic Optimization Algorithm. At all levels of confidence and optimal values of risk based on the estimation of SPP-CVAR method by Particle Swarm Algorithm (PSA) is less than genetic algorithm, which indicates better performance of Particle Swarm Algorithm (PSA) than Genetic Algorithm (GA). Also, the optimum wealth obtained from PSA solution is higher at all levels of confidence than the corresponding value of Genetic Algorithm (GA), and this is another reason to confirm the performance of PSO algorithm compared to the Genetic Algorithm (GA). The values of the first goal function, obtained from the PSO algorithm, for all confidence levels are lower than those of the genetic algorithm. The optimum wealth obtained from PSA is higher than genetic algorithm. At 0.9 level, the value of LR of kupiec statistics for the SPP-CVAR method was less than the Chi-square statistics (Critical value) which was assumed to be acceptable.

Suggested Citation

  • Arezoo Mohammadi & Mehrzad Minnoei & Zadollah Fathi & Mohamamd Ali Keramati & Hossein Baktiari, 2022. "Optimal allocation of bank resources and risk reduction through portfolio decentralization," International Journal of Economic Sciences, European Research Center, vol. 11(2), pages 92-143, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:aop:jijoes:v:11:y:2022:i:2:p:92-143
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eurrec.org/ijoes-article-117006
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://eurrec.org/ijoes-article-117006?download=7
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Masoud Fekri & Babak Barazandeh, 2019. "Designing an Optimal Portfolio for Iran's Stock Market with Genetic Algorithm using Neural Network Prediction of Risk and Return Stocks," Papers 1903.06632, arXiv.org.
    2. Sharma, Prateek & Vipul,, 2015. "Performance of risk-based portfolios under different market conditions: Evidence from India," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C), pages 397-411.
    3. Ding, Dong & Sickles, Robin C., 2018. "Frontier Efficiency, Capital Structure, and Portfolio Risk: An Empirical Analysis of U.S. Banks," Working Papers 18-005, Rice University, Department of Economics.
    4. Jan Vorlicek & Klara Cermakova, 2017. "Strategic Behavior as the Cause of Business Cycles," International Journal of Economic Sciences, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences, vol. 6(1), pages 33-40, May.
    5. Kim, Woo Chang & Kim, Min Jeong & Kim, Jang Ho & Fabozzi, Frank J., 2014. "Robust portfolios that do not tilt factor exposure," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 411-421.
    6. Imbierowicz, Björn & Rauch, Christian, 2014. "The relationship between liquidity risk and credit risk in banks," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 242-256.
    7. Georg Pflug & David Wozabal, 2007. "Ambiguity in portfolio selection," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(4), pages 435-442.
    8. Pascal J. Maenhout, 2004. "Robust Portfolio Rules and Asset Pricing," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 17(4), pages 951-983.
    9. Zhou, Xiaoyang & Xu, Zhongwen & Chai, Jian & Yao, Liming & Wang, Shouyang & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "Efficiency evaluation for banking systems under uncertainty: A multi-period three-stage DEA model," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 68-82.
    10. Asrin Karimi, 2014. "Credit Risk Modeling for Commercial Banks," International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences, vol. 4(3), pages 187-192, July.
    11. C Papahristodoulou & E Dotzauer, 2004. "Optimal portfolios using linear programming models," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 55(11), pages 1169-1177, November.
    12. Eduard Hromada & Tomáš Krulický, 2021. "Investing in Real Estate in the Czech Republic and Analyzing the Dependence of Profitability and Technical and Socio-Economic Factors," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(18), pages 1-12, September.
    13. David Stefanovits & Urs Schubiger & Mario V. Wüthrich, 2014. "Model Risk in Portfolio Optimization," Risks, MDPI, vol. 2(3), pages 1-34, August.
    14. Bednarek, Ziemowit & Patel, Pratish, 2018. "Understanding the outperformance of the minimum variance portfolio," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 175-178.
    15. Boris Georgiev, 2014. "Constrained Mean-Variance Portfolio Optimization with Alternative Return Estimation," Atlantic Economic Journal, Springer;International Atlantic Economic Society, vol. 42(1), pages 91-107, March.
    16. Balbás, Alejandro & Balbás, Beatriz & Balbás, Raquel, 2016. "Good deals and benchmarks in robust portfolio selection," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 666-678.
    17. Hammoudeh, Shawkat & Araújo Santos, Paulo & Al-Hassan, Abdullah, 2013. "Downside risk management and VaR-based optimal portfolios for precious metals, oil and stocks," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 318-334.
    18. Fathi Abid & Pui Lam Leung & Mourad Mroua & Wing Keung Wong, 2014. "International Diversification Versus Domestic Diversification: Mean-Variance Portfolio Optimization and Stochastic Dominance Approaches," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-22, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. David Wozabal, 2014. "Robustifying Convex Risk Measures for Linear Portfolios: A Nonparametric Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(6), pages 1302-1315, December.
    2. Hachmi Ben Ameur & Mouna Boujelbène & J. L. Prigent & Emna Triki, 2020. "Optimal Portfolio Positioning on Multiple Assets Under Ambiguity," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 56(1), pages 21-57, June.
    3. Len Patrick Dominic M. Garces & Yang Shen, 2024. "Robust optimal investment and consumption strategies with portfolio constraints and stochastic environment," Papers 2407.02831, arXiv.org.
    4. Bingyan Han, 2022. "Distributionally robust risk evaluation with a causality constraint and structural information," Papers 2203.10571, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2024.
    5. Panos Xidonas & Ralph Steuer & Christis Hassapis, 2020. "Robust portfolio optimization: a categorized bibliographic review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 292(1), pages 533-552, September.
    6. David Wozabal, 2012. "A framework for optimization under ambiguity," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 193(1), pages 21-47, March.
    7. Lartey, Theophilus & James, Gregory A. & Danso, Albert, 2021. "Interbank funding, bank risk exposure and performance in the UK: A three-stage network DEA approach," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 75(C).
    8. Junichi Imai, 2022. "A Numerical Method for Hedging Bermudan Options under Model Uncertainty," Methodology and Computing in Applied Probability, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 893-916, June.
    9. Kim, Jang Ho & Kim, Woo Chang & Fabozzi, Frank J., 2013. "Composition of robust equity portfolios," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 72-81.
    10. Yehuda Izhakian, 2012. "Capital Asset Pricing Under Ambiguity," Working Papers 12-02, New York University, Leonard N. Stern School of Business, Department of Economics.
    11. Giulio Velliscig & Josanco Floreani & Maurizio Polato, 2023. "Capital and asset quality implications for bank resilience and performance in the light of NPLs’ regulation: a focus on the Texas ratio," Journal of Banking Regulation, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 24(1), pages 66-88, March.
    12. Kim, Woo Chang & Kim, Jang Ho & Fabozzi, Frank J., 2014. "Deciphering robust portfolios," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 1-8.
    13. Pflug, Georg Ch. & Pichler, Alois & Wozabal, David, 2012. "The 1/N investment strategy is optimal under high model ambiguity," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 410-417.
    14. Li, Xingchen & Xu, Guangcheng & Wu, Jie & Xu, Chengzhen & Zhu, Qingyuan, 2024. "Evaluation of bank efficiency by considering the uncertainty of nonperforming loans," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 126(C).
    15. Cagli, Efe Caglar & Taskin, Dilvin & Evrim Mandaci, Pınar, 2019. "The short- and long-run efficiency of energy, precious metals, and base metals markets: Evidence from the exponential smooth transition autoregressive models," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    16. Rhys Bidder & Ian Dew-Becker, 2016. "Long-Run Risk Is the Worst-Case Scenario," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(9), pages 2494-2527, September.
    17. Hansen, Lars Peter, 2013. "Uncertainty Outside and Inside Economic Models," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2013-7, Nobel Prize Committee.
    18. Shabir, Mohsin & Jiang, Ping & Shahab, Yasir & Wang, Wenhao & Işık, Özcan & Mehroush, Iqra, 2024. "Diversification and bank stability: Role of political instability and climate risk," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 89(PB), pages 63-92.
    19. Qi Nan Zhai, 2015. "Asset Pricing Under Ambiguity and Heterogeneity," PhD Thesis, Finance Discipline Group, UTS Business School, University of Technology, Sydney, number 16, July-Dece.
    20. Zhi Chen & Melvyn Sim & Huan Xu, 2019. "Distributionally Robust Optimization with Infinitely Constrained Ambiguity Sets," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 67(5), pages 1328-1344, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Risky and non-risky assets; New portfolio; Bank deposits; Risk ; PSO ; PSA;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G20 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - General
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aop:jijoes:v:11:y:2022:i:2:p:92-143. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Jiri Rotschedl (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://ijoes.eurrec.org/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.