IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/jfinec/v10y2012i4p703-732.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prospect Performance Evaluation: Making a Case for a Non-asymptotic UMPU Test

Author

Listed:
  • Zhidong Bai
  • Yongchang Hui
  • Wing-Keung Wong
  • Ričardas Zitikis

Abstract

We propose and develop mean-variance-ratio (MVR) statistics for comparing the performance of prospects (e.g., investment portfolios, assets, etc.) after the effect of the background risk has been mitigated. We investigate the performance of the statistics in large and small samples and show that in the non-asymptotic framework, the MVR statistic produces a uniformly most powerful unbiased (UMPU) test. We discuss the applicability of the MVR test in the case of large samples and illustrate its superiority in the case of small samples by analyzing Korea and Singapore stock returns after the impact of the American stock returns (which we view as the background risk) has been deducted. We find, in particular, that when samples are small, the MVR statistic can detect differences in asset performances while the Sharpe ratio test, which is the mean-standard-deviation-ratio statistic, may not be able to do so. Copyright The Author, 2012. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Zhidong Bai & Yongchang Hui & Wing-Keung Wong & Ričardas Zitikis, 2012. "Prospect Performance Evaluation: Making a Case for a Non-asymptotic UMPU Test," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 10(4), pages 703-732, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:jfinec:v:10:y:2012:i:4:p:703-732
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/jjfinec/nbr020
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    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:oup:jfinec:v:10:y:2012:i:4:p:703-732. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/sofieea.html .

    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.