IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/war/wpaper/2020-21.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

HRP performance comparison in portfolio optimization under various codependence and distance metrics

Author

Listed:
  • Illya Barziy
  • Marcin Chlebus

    (Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw)

Abstract

Problem of portfolio optimization was formulated almost 70 years ago in the works of Harry Markowitz. However, the studies of possible optimization methods are still being provided in order to obtain better results of asset allocation using the empirical approximations of codependences between assets. In this work various codependences and metrics are tested in the Hierarchical Risk Parity algorithm to determine whether the results obtained are superior to those of the standard Pearson correlation as a measure of codependence. In order to compare how HRP uses the information from alternative codependence metrics, the MV, IVP, and CLA optimization algorithms were used on the same data. Dataset used for comparison consisted of 32 ETFs representing equity of different regions and sectors as well as bonds and commodities. The time period tested was 01.01.2007-20.12.2019. Results show that alternative codependence metrics show worse results in terms of Sharpe ratios and maximum drawdowns in comparison to the standard Pearson correlation for each optimization method used. The added value of this work is using alternative codependence and distance metrics on real data, and including transaction costs to determine their impact on the result of each algorithm.

Suggested Citation

  • Illya Barziy & Marcin Chlebus, 2020. "HRP performance comparison in portfolio optimization under various codependence and distance metrics," Working Papers 2020-21, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    • Handle: RePEc:war:wpaper:2020-21
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.wne.uw.edu.pl/index.php/download_file/5735/
    File Function: First version, 2020
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ledoit, Oliver & Wolf, Michael, 2008. "Robust performance hypothesis testing with the Sharpe ratio," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(5), pages 850-859, December.
    2. Johann Pfitzinger & Nico Katzke, 2019. "A constrained hierarchical risk parity algorithm with cluster-based capital allocation," Working Papers 14/2019, Stellenbosch University, Department of Economics.
    3. Prayut Jain & Shashi Jain, 2019. "Can Machine Learning-Based Portfolios Outperform Traditional Risk-Based Portfolios? The Need to Account for Covariance Misspecification," Risks, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-27, July.
    4. Merton, Robert C, 1969. "Lifetime Portfolio Selection under Uncertainty: The Continuous-Time Case," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 51(3), pages 247-257, August.
    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. Christian Fieberg & Lars Hornuf & David J. Streich, 2023. "Using GPT-4 for Financial Advice," CESifo Working Paper Series 10529, CESifo.
    2. P. A. Forsyth & K. R. Vetzal, 2017. "Robust Asset Allocation For Long-Term Target-Based Investing," International Journal of Theoretical and Applied Finance (IJTAF), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 20(03), pages 1-32, May.
    3. Bernd Scherer, 2021. "Adding alternative assets: return enhancement, diversification or hedging?," Journal of Asset Management, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 22(6), pages 437-442, October.
    4. Maria Kyriacou & Jose Olmo & Marius Strittmatter, 2021. "Optimal portfolio allocation using option‐implied information," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 41(2), pages 266-285, February.
    5. Peter Cotton, 2024. "Schur Complementary Allocation: A Unification of Hierarchical Risk Parity and Minimum Variance Portfolios," Papers 2411.05807, arXiv.org.
    6. Jean-Baptiste Hasse & Christelle Lecourt & Souhila Siagh, 2023. "Institutional Stock-Bond Portfolios Rebalancing and Financial Stability," AMSE Working Papers 2322, Aix-Marseille School of Economics, France.
    7. Zareei, Abalfazl, 2019. "Network origins of portfolio risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    8. Anne Lavigne, 2006. "Gouvernance et investissement des fonds de pension privés aux Etats-Unis," Working Papers halshs-00081401, HAL.
    9. An Chen & Thai Nguyen & Thorsten Sehner, 2022. "Unit-Linked Tontine: Utility-Based Design, Pricing and Performance," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-27, April.
    10. Alan J. Auerbach, 1981. "Evaluating the Taxation of Risky Assets," NBER Working Papers 0806, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Hong, Claire Yurong & Lu, Xiaomeng & Pan, Jun, 2021. "FinTech adoption and household risk-taking," BOFIT Discussion Papers 14/2021, Bank of Finland Institute for Emerging Economies (BOFIT).
    12. Curatola, Giuliano, 2022. "Price impact, strategic interaction and portfolio choice," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 59(C).
    13. Auffret, Philippe, 2001. "An alternative unifying measure of welfare gains from risk-sharing," Policy Research Working Paper Series 2676, The World Bank.
    14. Luca De Gennaro Aquino & Sascha Desmettre & Yevhen Havrylenko & Mogens Steffensen, 2024. "Equilibrium control theory for Kihlstrom-Mirman preferences in continuous time," Papers 2407.16525, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2024.
    15. Chen, An & Hieber, Peter & Sureth, Caren, 2022. "Pay for tax certainty? Advance tax rulings for risky investment under multi-dimensional tax uncertainty," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 273, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    16. Mayank Goel & Suresh Kumar K., 2006. "A Risk-Sensitive Portfolio Optimisation Problem with Stochastic Interest Rate," Journal of Emerging Market Finance, Institute for Financial Management and Research, vol. 5(3), pages 263-282, December.
    17. Muhinyuza, Stanislas & Bodnar, Taras & Lindholm, Mathias, 2020. "A test on the location of the tangency portfolio on the set of feasible portfolios," Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier, vol. 386(C).
    18. Andreas Fagereng & Luigi Guiso & Davide Malacrino & Luigi Pistaferri, 2020. "Heterogeneity and Persistence in Returns to Wealth," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 88(1), pages 115-170, January.
    19. Yuqian Xu & Lingjiong Zhu & Michael Pinedo, 2020. "Operational Risk Management: A Stochastic Control Framework with Preventive and Corrective Controls," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 68(6), pages 1804-1825, November.
    20. Malavasi, Matteo & Ortobelli Lozza, Sergio & Trück, Stefan, 2021. "Second order of stochastic dominance efficiency vs mean variance efficiency," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 290(3), pages 1192-1206.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Hierarchical Risk Parity; portfolio optimization; ETF; hierarchical structure; clustering; backtesting; distance metrics; risk management; machine learning;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C32 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Time-Series Models; Dynamic Quantile Regressions; Dynamic Treatment Effect Models; Diffusion Processes; State Space Models
    • C38 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Multiple or Simultaneous Equation Models; Multiple Variables - - - Classification Methdos; Cluster Analysis; Principal Components; Factor Analysis
    • C44 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics - - - Operations Research; Statistical Decision Theory
    • C51 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Construction and Estimation
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis
    • C65 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Miscellaneous Mathematical Tools
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G15 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - International Financial Markets

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:war:wpaper:2020-21. 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: Marcin Bąba (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/fesuwpl.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.