WHAT IS THE SHARPE RATIO, AND HOW CAN EVERYONE GET IT WRONG? arxv:1802.04413v1 [q-fn.pm] 13 Feb 2018 IGOR RIVIN Abstract. The Sharpe rato s the most wdely used rsk metrc n the quanttatve fnance communty - amazngly, essentally everyone gets t wrong. In ths note, we wll make a quxotc effort to rectfy the stuaton. 1. Introducton The Sharpe rato was ntroduced over ffty years ago by Wllam F. Sharpe n [Sha66] (Sharpe revsed the defnton slghtly almost thrty years later n [Sha94]). The Sharpe rato s a measure of rsk-adjusted returns, and was ntally ntended to dstngush truly superor strateges from ones where the portfolo manager smply levered up a medocre strategy. Such leverng up would outperform the market n good tmes, and then crash n burn when thngs turned bad. The Sharpe rato (n ts most current ncarnaton) s defned as: (1) S a = E(R a R b ) σ a, where R a s the expected return of the asset, R b s the rsk-free return rate, and σ a s the standard devaton of the asset returns. A statstcally nclned reader wll be sure to note the more-than-passng resemblance of the Sharpe rato to the t-statstc, and so quantfes the evdence that the nvestment strategy s better than the proverbal monkeys throwng darts at the (by now vrtual) stock table. Whle the Sharpe rato s wdely used by nvestors (to decde whch nvestment vehcle s preferable), t s also very sgnfcant as an nternal measure n the quanttatve fnance communty - a hgh Sharpe rato ndcates that t s extremely unlkely that the strategy wll lose money n any gven year, and so allows the portfolo manager to lever up the portfolo wthout too much rsk of run. 2. How s the Sharpe rato computed? The quanttes n formula (1) are annual quanttes, and so, n prncple, to get reasonable estmates of all the varable, we should examne a portfolo manager s return over a few decades. Ths s obvously mpractcal - the portfolo manager may well beretred(or dead) bythetme areasonable valuesobtan, andthevaluewll be meanngless n any case, snce the character of the market changes consderably over such lengthy tme scales. Consequently, n practce, Sharpe rato s computed usng the daly (sometmes monthly) return stream. In order to make ths computaton feasble, a basc assumpton s made: 1
2 IGOR RIVIN The daly returns are ndependent dentcally dstrbuted (..d) random varables. Whle ths assumpton s clearly false on a number of grounds (there s seasonalty n the markets, so the returns are not dentcally dstrbuted, and there are momentum and reversal phenomena, whch means that they are not ndependent), these assumptons are not too far from realty, and we wll not quarrel wth them here, snce the real confuson s just begnnng: An assumpton s made that (snce the returns are small) the return over a number of days equals sum of the returns on the ndvdual days, or n (1+r ) = 1+ r. Ths s then used n the followng way: the yearly return s the sum of 252 (the tradtonally accepted number of tradng days n a year) daly returns. Snce the mean and varance are both expectatons, both grow lnearly wth the sze of sample. The standard devaton s the square root of varance, so, when the smoke clears, the formula used unversally s: (2) S a = 252 E(R a(d) R b (d), σ a (d) where the d now ndcates daly returns. 3. The correct way Let us now see what the truth s. As mentoned above, the actual annual return over n perods s X n = (1+r ). Snce the daly returns are..d, the expectaton of the product s the product of the expectatons, so What about the varance? E(X n ) = (1+µ(d)) n. Var(X n ) = E(X 2 n ) E(X n) 2 = E( = 1 n (1+r ) 2 ] (1+µ(d)) 2n = E(1+r ) 2 ) (1+µ(d)) 2n = ((1+µ) 2 )+σ 2 ) n ( ) n σ 2 (1+µ) 2n 2 (1+µ) 2 =
WHAT IS THE SHARPE RATIO, AND HOW CAN EVERYONE GET IT WRONG? 3 So, fnally, we have the followng formula for the Sharpe rato under the dentcal ndependent daly returns assumpton: I a = n ( n (1+µ) n 1 ), σ 2 (1+µ) 2n 2 Where µ, σ s the mean and standard devaton (respectvely) of daly returns. The frst queston s: Queston 3.1. s I a close to S a under the assumpton of small returns? The answer s: NO. Indeed, f the returns are qute small, then t s not unreasonable to approxmate the numerator of I a by nµ. If the volatlty s also qute low, t s qute reasonable to say that only the frst term n the sum n the denomnator contrbutes sgnfcantly. When the smoke clears, we get the followng approxmaton: For µ,σ 1, I a µ n (1+(n 1)µ)σ. Notce that ths dffers from S a by a factor of (1 + (n 1)µ). Snce (n 1)µ s approxmately the yearly return (under our hypothess) the error s nontrval even under the small returns and volatltes hypothess. The errors are much more egregous a lttle further away from the heat death lmt. Consder, for example, the performance of crypto-currences. Btcon has run up hugely over the last few years, and f the usual formula S a s used, the (one year lookback) Sharpe of Btcon (at the tme of wrtng), s around 2.5 (see, for example https://www.sfrdata.com/cryptocurrency-sharpe-ratos/. By contrast, the correct Sharpe rato(as posted on http://cc30.com) s 0.83, whch s not so dfferent from the S&P 500 over the same perod. 4. Why s the standard calculaton so wrong? As far as ths author can tell, the reason s more socologcal than mathematcal. Remember that the prmary audence for Sharpe conssted of nvestment managers - people who were probably good salesmen wth good connectons, but no understandng of mathematcs. In partcular, no understandng of logarthms. So, for them, lfe became much smpler f log(1+x) = x, as a drect consequence, the product of returns s roughly the sum of returns. Before we heap derson on these people, we should note that from the vewpont of Kelly bettng (see the canoncal reference [MTZ11]) we want to deal wth the logs, and so a very reasonable quantty to use s Sharpe rato n log space, computed as: L a = n E(logR a(d) log(r b (d))). σ(logr a (d) Now, L a s much closer to S a than to I a, and arguably t s a more reasonable rsk measure: Suppose you have an nvestment that (wth equal probablty) multples by 8 or halves by 2. The mean return s 3.25, the varance of returns s 38.6875. The correct Sharpe rato as computed by I a s 1.34810 72, so t judges ths a rather poor nvestment.by contrast, the log-sharpe L a rato s 5.29, ndcatng that ths s a very good nvestment. The regular sharpe rato S a s 8.29. It s clear that the last two
4 IGOR RIVIN numbers are more ndcatve than the frst one. Why s ths happenng? Because the the fluctuatons n the tal end of the year (by whch tme the account holder almost certanly owns ths, and all other, unverses) dwarf the returns for most of the year. 5. Concluson It s ths author s strongly held opnon that the Log-Sharpe rato L a s the rght metrc to use. However, f you do want to compute the actual Sharpe rato (and many portfolo managers are requred to do so by ther nvestors), then use I a. References [MTZ11] Leonard C MacLean, Edward O Thorp, and Wllam T Zemba. The Kelly captal growth nvestment crteron: Theory and practce, volume 3. world scentfc, 2011. [Sha66] Wllam F Sharpe. Mutual fund performance. The Journal of busness, 39(1):119 138, 1966. [Sha94] Wllam F Sharpe. The sharpe rato. Journal of portfolo management, 21(1):49 58, 1994. Mathematcs Department, Temple Unversty and The Cryptos Fund E-mal address: rvn@temple.edu
Ths fgure "frog.jpg" s avalable n "jpg" format from: http://arxv.org/ps/1802.04413v1