IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/vrs/jecman/v43y2021i1p154-178n13.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Ranking of optimal stock portfolios determined on the basis of expected utility maximization criterion

Author

Listed:
  • Giemza Dawid

    (University of Economics in Katowice)

Abstract

Aim/purpose – The aim of the paper is to rank the optimal portfolios of shares of companies listed on the Warsaw Stock Exchange, taking into account the investor’s propensity to risk. Design/methodology/approach – Investment portfolios consisting of varied number of companies selected from WIG 20 index were built. Next, the weights of equity holdings of these companies in the entire portfolio were determined, maximizing portfolio’s expected (square) utility function, and then the obtained structures were compared between investors with various levels of risk propensity. Using Hellwig’s taxonomic development measure, a ranking of optimum stock portfolios depending on the investor’s risk propensity was prepared. The research analyzed quotations from 248 trading sessions. Findings – The findings indicated that whilst there are differences in the weight structures of equity holdings in the entire portfolio between the investor characterized by aversion to risk at the level of γ = 10 and the investor characterized by aversion to risk at the level of γ = 100, the rankings of the constructed optimum portfolios demonstrate strong similarity. The study validated, in conformity with the literature, that with the increase in the number of equity holdings in the portfolio, the portfolio risk initially decreases and then becomes stable at a certain level. Research implications/limitations – The study used data from the past as for which there is no guarantee that they will be adequate for the future. There is sensitivity to the selection of the period from which the historic data come. When changing the period of the analyzed historic data by a small time unit it may prove that the portfolio composition will become totally different. Originality/value/contribution – The paper compares the composition of optimum stock portfolios depending on the investor’s propensity to risk. Their ranking was created using the taxonomic method for this purpose. Taking advantage of this method also additional variables can be taken into account, which describe and differentiate the portfolio and they can be assigned relevant significance depending on the investor’s preferences.

Suggested Citation

  • Giemza Dawid, 2021. "Ranking of optimal stock portfolios determined on the basis of expected utility maximization criterion," Journal of Economics and Management, Sciendo, vol. 43(1), pages 154-178, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:vrs:jecman:v:43:y:2021:i:1:p:154-178:n:13
    DOI: 10.22367/jem.2021.43.08
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.22367/jem.2021.43.08
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22367/jem.2021.43.08?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hasbrouck, Joel, 1991. "Measuring the Information Content of Stock Trades," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(1), pages 179-207, March.
    2. Taras Bodnar & Yarema Okhrin & Valdemar Vitlinskyy & Taras Zabolotskyy, 2018. "Determination and estimation of risk aversion coefficients," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 15(2), pages 297-317, June.
    3. Kolm, Petter N. & Tütüncü, Reha & Fabozzi, Frank J., 2014. "60 Years of portfolio optimization: Practical challenges and current trends," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 234(2), pages 356-371.
    4. Kim, Woo Chang & Kim, Jang Ho & Fabozzi, Frank J., 2014. "Deciphering robust portfolios," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 1-8.
    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. Jang Ho Kim & Yongjae Lee & Woo Chang Kim & Frank J. Fabozzi, 2022. "Goal-based investing based on multi-stage robust portfolio optimization," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 313(2), pages 1141-1158, June.
    2. Jang Ho Kim & Woo Chang Kim & Frank J. Fabozzi, 2017. "Penalizing variances for higher dependency on factors," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 17(4), pages 479-489, April.
    3. Sandra Caçador & Joana Matos Dias & Pedro Godinho, 2020. "Global minimum variance portfolios under uncertainty: a robust optimization approach," Journal of Global Optimization, Springer, vol. 76(2), pages 267-293, February.
    4. 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.
    5. Jean-Philippe Bouchaud & Julien Kockelkoren & Marc Potters, 2006. "Random walks, liquidity molasses and critical response in financial markets," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 6(2), pages 115-123.
    6. Sun, Yuxin & Ibikunle, Gbenga, 2017. "Informed trading and the price impact of block trades: A high frequency trading analysis," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 114-129.
    7. Thomas George & Chuan-Yang Hwang & Tavy Ronen, 2010. "Bootstrap refinements in tests of microstructure frictions," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 35(1), pages 47-70, July.
    8. Yue Zhao & Difang Wan, 2018. "Institutional high frequency trading and price discovery: Evidence from an emerging commodity futures market," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 38(2), pages 243-270, February.
    9. Pastor, Lubos & Stambaugh, Robert F., 2003. "Liquidity Risk and Expected Stock Returns," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(3), pages 642-685, June.
    10. Benos, Evangelos & Sagade, Satchit, 2012. "High-frequency trading behaviour and its impact on market quality: evidence from the UK equity market," Bank of England working papers 469, Bank of England.
    11. Chang, Sanders S. & Wang, F. Albert, 2015. "Adverse selection and the presence of informed trading," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 19-33.
    12. Fuertes, Ana-Maria & Phylaktis, Kate & Yan, Cheng, 2019. "Uncovered equity “disparity” in emerging markets," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 1-1.
    13. Koski, Jennifer Lynch, 1998. "Measurement Effects and the Variance of Returns after Stock Splits and Stock Dividends," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 11(1), pages 143-162.
    14. Malay K. Dey & B. Radhakrishna (Radha), 2007. "Who Trades Around Earnings Announcements? Evidence from TORQ Data," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 34(1‐2), pages 269-291, January.
    15. Gerhard, Frank & Hess, Dieter & Pohlmeier, Winfried, 1998. "What a Difference a Day Makes: On the Common Market Microstructure of Trading Days," CoFE Discussion Papers 98/01, University of Konstanz, Center of Finance and Econometrics (CoFE).
    16. Schlepper, Kathi & Riordan, Ryan & Hofer, Heiko & Schrimpf, Andreas, 2017. "Scarcity effects of QE: A transaction-level analysis in the Bund market," Discussion Papers 06/2017, Deutsche Bundesbank.
    17. Hasbrouck, Joel, 1996. "Order characteristics and stock price evolution An application to program trading," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 129-149, May.
    18. Corò, Filippo & Dufour, Alfonso & Varotto, Simone, 2013. "Credit and liquidity components of corporate CDS spreads," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(12), pages 5511-5525.
    19. Sucarrat, Genaro, 2009. "Forecast Evaluation of Explanatory Models of Financial Variability," Economics - The Open-Access, Open-Assessment E-Journal (2007-2020), Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW Kiel), vol. 3, pages 1-33.
    20. Bernhardt, Dan & Hughson, Eric, 2002. "Intraday trade in dealership markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 46(9), pages 1697-1732, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    optimal portfolio; expected rate of return on the portfolio; portfolio standard deviation; expected utility theory; multidimensional comparative analysis;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G10 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - General (includes Measurement and Data)
    • 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:vrs:jecman:v:43:y:2021:i:1:p:154-178:n:13. 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: Peter Golla (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.sciendo.com .

    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.