Forecast Risk Bias in Optimized Portfolios

Similar documents
Integrating ESG in the Investment Process. Remy Briand, Managing Director & Global Head of Index and ESG Research

CUSTOM INDEX ON MSCI EM (EMERGING MARKETS) LOW CARBON LEADERS EX REITS 10/50 *

Michael (Xiaochen) Sun, PHD. November msci.com

MSCI ALL PORTUGAL PLUS 25/50 INDEX

MSCI USA Broad ESG Index

MSCI CANADA CUSTOM CAPPED INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI CANADA HIGH DIVIDEND YIELD 10% SECURITY CAPPED INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI Value Weighted Indices Methodology

MSCI EMERGING MARKETS HORIZON INDEX METHODOLOGY

IPD AUSTRALIA HEALTHCARE INDEX

MSCI EM 50 Index Methodology

MSCI RUSSIA CAPPED INDEX

MSCI EUROPE ENERGY 35/20 CAPPED INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI Short and Leveraged Daily Indices Methodology

Sector Models: An Insightful View of Risk and Return

MSCI EQUITY INDEX POLICY REGARDING UNITED STATES IRS 871(M) REGULATIONS RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF A QUALIFIED INDEX

LONG SHORT STRATEGY INDEX ON MSCI JAPAN IMI CUSTOM (GROSS) 85% + CASH (JPY) 15% INDEX* METHODOLOGY

MSCI JAPAN IMI CUSTOM LIQUIDITY AND YIELD LOW VOLATILITY INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI Economic Exposure Indices

INDEX METHODOLOGY MSCI WORLD ESG YIELD SELECT VARIANCE INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI CANADA HIGH DIVIDEND YIELD 10% SECURITY CAPPED INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI ALL PAKISTAN SELECT 25/50 INDEX METHODOLOGY

GENERAL GENERAL Q&A. Potential impact on the MSCI Equity Indexes of the United Kingdom s exit from the European Union ( Brexit ) January 23, 2019

MSCI Risk Weighted Indices Methodology

METHODOLOGY BOOK FOR: - MSCI EMERGING MARKETS IMI (JST FIXING) INDEX - MSCI KOKUSAI (JST FIXING) INDEX

MSCI RUSSIA LOCAL LIQUIDITY SCREENED CAPPED INDEX

MSCI CARBON FOOTPRINT INDEX RATIOS METHODOLOGY

MSCI SIZE TILT INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI CYCLICAL AND DEFENSIVE SECTORS INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI MALAYSIA IMI ISLAMIC HIGH DIVIDEND YIELD 10/40

TEMPORARY TREATMENT OF UNEQUAL VOTING STRUCTURES IN THE MSCI EQUITY INDEXES

MSCI Overseas China Index: Early Inclusion Proposal

MSCI ACWI IMI TIMBER SELECT CAPPED INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI LATIN AMERICA PACIFIC ALLIANCE INDEX

MSCI CUSTOM RISK WEIGHTED INDEXES

MSCI USA ESG SELECT INDEX METHODOLOGY

Partial tender offers

MSCI 25/50 INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI Global Environment Indices Methodology

MSCI FRONTIER EMERGING MARKETS INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI High Dividend Yield Indices Methodology

MSCI Global Socially Responsible Indexes

Market Insight When Hurricane Sandy Closed Wall Street

OTC Derivatives under Central Clearing: Risk Measures for Liquidity Constraints

MSCI AUSTRALIA SELECT HIGH DIVIDEND YIELD INDEX

MSCI EUROPE ESG LEADERS SELECT TOP 50 DIVIDEND INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI Asia APEX Indexes Methodology

MSCI VOLATILITY TILT INDEXES METHODOLOGY

Multiple Industry Allocations in the Barra US Equity Model (USE3)

MSCI ALL COLOMBIA LOCAL LISTED RISK WEIGHTED INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI ALL COLOMBIA LOCAL LISTED RISK WEIGHTED INDEX METHODOLOGY

METHODOLOGY BOOK FOR: - OFI REVENUE WEIGHTED GLOBAL INDEX - OFI REVENUE WEIGHTED INTERNATIONAL INDEX - OFI REVENUE WEIGHTED EMERGING MARKETS INDEX

INDEX METHODOLOGY MSCI RETURN SPREAD INDEXES METHODOLOGY

NORTHERN TRUST INDEX ON MSCI EMERGING MARKETS*

MSCI MINIMUM VOLATILITY INDEXES METHODOLOGY

METHODOLOGY BOOK FOR: - MSCI USA SELECT QUALITY YIELD INDEX - MSCI EMERGING MARKETS SELECT QUALITY YIELD INDEX - MSCI UNITED KINGDOM

MSCI Short and Leveraged Daily Indexes Methodology

MSCI Diversified Multi-Factor Indexes Methodology

METHODOLOGY BOOK FOR: - MSCI WORLD SELECT SRI INDEX - MSCI EUROPE SELECT SRI INDEX

MSCI CUSTOM RISK WEIGHTED INDEXES

BETA ADVANTAGE SUSTAINABLE GLOBAL EQUITY INCOME 200 INDEX

MSCI MARKET NEUTRAL BARRA FACTOR INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI TOP 50 DIVIDEND INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI EFM AFRICA CAPPED + GCC COUNTRIES CAPPED SPECIAL WEIGHTED 10/40 INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI CHINA A 50 INDEX METHODOLOGY

Canadian Mergers and Acquisitions consultation - September MSCI Inc. All rights reserved. msci.com

MSCI ESG Research: ESG themes and the NZ50

MSCI GLOBAL EX FOSSIL FUEL INDEXES METHODOLOGY

Consultation on Potential Enhancements to the MSCI Hedged Indices. January 2009

Minimum Volatility Strategies at Times of High Volatility September 24, 2008

MSCI CYCLICAL AND DEFENSIVE SECTORS INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI TADAWUL 30 INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI GLOBAL EX CONTROVERSIAL WEAPONS INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI EMERGING + FRONTIER MARKETS WORKFORCE INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI CUSTOM RISK WEIGHTED INDEXES

CONTENTS. 1 Introduction Constructing the MSCI ESG Leaders Low Carbon ex Tobacco Involvement 5% Indexes... 4

MSCI FRANCE SELECT 70 EQUAL WEIGHTED 5% DECREMENT INDEX

MSCI RUSSIA SELECT SIZE & LIQUIDITY 10/40 INDEX METHODOLOGY

Proposal to Introduce Frequency of. Frontier Markets IMI MSCI Inc. All rights reserved. msci.com

INDEX METHODOLOGY MSCI HONG KONG+ September 2017

MSCI CHINA 50 INDEX METHODOLOGY

INDEX METHODOLOGY METHODOLOGY BOOK FOR: - MSCI EURO SELECT DIVIDEND INDEX 10% RISK CONTROL DECREMENT INDEX

MSCI FACTOR MIX A- SERIES INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI EQUAL COUNTRY WEIGHTED INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI USA Catholic Values Index

Factor Investing & Smart Beta

MSCI WMA PRIVATE INVESTOR INDEX SERIES METHODOLOGY

MSCI INDEX - OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

OFI REVENUE WEIGHTED GLOBAL ESG INDEX METHODOLOGY. May 2018

MSCI US LISTING REQUIREMENTS INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI Global ESG Indexes Methodology

Manager Risk Contribution: Attributing Risk in a Multi-Manager Portfolio

MSCI CHINA A CUSTOM QUALITY VALUE 100 INDEX METHODOLOGY

MSCI EQUITY INDEX COMMITTEE

MSCI DIVERSIFIED MULTIPLE-FACTOR INDEXES METHODOLOGY

Volatility Regimes in the US

MSCI SELECT INDEXES FOR MEXICAN AFORES

MSCI DIVERSIFIED MULTIPLE-FACTOR INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI DIVIDEND POINTS INDEXES METHODOLOGY

MSCI DIVERSIFIED MULTI-FACTOR INDEXES METHODOLOGY

Transcription:

Forecast Risk Bias in Optimized Portfolios March 2011 Presented to Qwafafew, Denver Chapter Jenn Bender, Jyh-Huei Lee, Dan Stefek, Jay Yao

Portfolio Construction Portfolio construction is the process of determining asset weights that best represent return and risk trade-off 2

Portfolio Construction Portfolio, Universe, Benchmark Risk Aversion, λ Forecast Returns, α Risk Model, Σ Constraints, Penalties (PN) Transaction(TC) and other Costs Optimization Maximizes a utility function, U(P). U(P) = α - λσ 2 p - TC - Optimal Portfolio What if there are errors in the inputs? 3

Errors in Expected Return Estimates A wealth of research over the years has dealt with errors in expected return estimates The problem was first described by Barry (1974), Michaud (1989), and Jorion (1992) Since then, proposed frameworks to deal with the problem include: Black-Litterman Robust optimization w/ alpha error estimates Bayesian methods / Shrinkage But note Kritzman (2006) argues that the return distribution of the presumed optimal portfolio is actually similar to the distribution of the truly optimal portfolio. Thus, mean-variance optimizers usually turn out to be more robust to small input errors than conventional wisdom assumes 4

Errors in Risk Model Estimates Covariance matrices are also subject to estimation (or sampling) error: As with expected returns, any sample covariance matrix contains estimation error Especially when the number of stocks >> the number of time periods for observed returns Error maximization (Michaud, 1989) When the sample covariance matrix is an input to a mean-variance optimizer, it will result in extreme and under-diversified portfolios 5

Errors in Risk Model Estimates Some solutions have been proposed Michaud (1998) Resampling : Not based upon an improved estimator of the covariance matrix From artificial return data resampled from the observed data, covariance matrices are sampled many times and fed into the mean-variance optimizer. The optimal portfolios which result are then averaged. Ledoit and Wolf (2004): Propose an improved estimator of the covariance matrix based on shrinkage. Shrinkage pulls the most extreme coefficients towards more central values Specifically finds an optimal linear combination of the sample covariance matrix and a highly structured estimator, which assumes that the correlation between the returns of any two stocks is always the same 6

Sampling Error Sampling error: Covariance matrix is based on a limited number of observations Estimating Σ for n assets over T time periods (T>n) Estimated Variance True Variance ( ˆ ) * * Σˆ hˆ ( ˆ ) * ˆ* Σh E h n = 1 E h T 2 Ratios below one represent underforecasting bias thus risk forecasts of optimized portfolios are biased low 7

Sampling Error If the universe consists of 100 assets and we construct the sample covariance matrix from weekly returns over 5 years of history, the forecast variance of an optimized portfolio is roughly 37% of the true variance If we expand the universe to 200 stocks, the forecast is only 5% of the true variance a 95% underestimation! 8

Factor Model Structure Helps Assume that the factor structure is known (i.e., there is no model error) and exposures to these factors are known T Σ= X FX + Idiosyncratic risk Factor risk k n We can show that the relevant ratio is now not T T Sampling mainly affects F, a k k matrix, which has much fewer dimensions than n x n With five years of weekly returns, the average bias is less than 3%, regardless of the number of assets Moreover, the greater proportion of specific risk in the portfolio, the less severe the effects of the errors 9

Simulations: How Bad is the Bias? Start with the Barra US Equity Short Term Model (USE3S) as of March 2008 68 factors in the model Assume this is the true risk model We build two types of risk models over many simulations: In each simulation, we generate histories of factor and specific returns (Z and w are multivariate standard normal): u= 1/ 2 z 1/ 2 f = F w Asset-by-asset covariance matrix: In each simulation run, we build a covariance matrix from a history of 200 periods of returns Factor-based covariance matrix: In each simulation, we build the factor covariance matrix and specific risk matrix separately; we assume that the asset factor exposures are known and need not be estimated 10

Simulations: How Bad is the Bias? We run two types of unconstrained, active optimizations: Stock selection Alphas are unrelated to the model factors Factor tilt Alphas are a randomly weighted combination of three USE3 style factors The weights change with each simulation run Universe/Benchmark = the 100 largest capitalization companies in the MSCI US Prime Market 750 Index 11

Simulation Results Simulation results for 100 assets: Risk Model Historical Asset Factor Based Risk Forecast over Truth (% ) Stock Selection Ratio of Component to Active Variance (% ) Forecast over Truth (% ) Factor Tilt Ratio of Component to Active Variance (% ) Active Variance 24.4 -- 24.5 -- Active Variance 96.7 100.0 92.7 100.0 Factor 83.7 11.4 83.5 37.2 Specific 98.3 88.6 98.1 62.8 12

Simulation Results Simulation results for 100 assets: Risk Model Historical Asset Factor Based Risk Forecast over Truth (% ) Stock Selection Ratio of Component to Active Variance (% ) Forecast over Truth (% ) Factor Tilt Ratio of Component to Active Variance (% ) Active Variance 24.4 -- 24.5 -- Active Variance 96.7 100.0 92.7 100.0 Factor 83.7 11.4 83.5 37.2 Specific 98.3 88.6 98.1 62.8 Simulation results for 750 assets: Risk Model Factor Based Risk Forecast over Truth (% ) Stock Selection Ratio of Component to Active Variance (% ) Forecast over Truth (% ) Factor Tilt Ratio of Component to Active Variance (% ) Active Variance 97.2 100.0 80.9 100.0 Factor 65.5 2.8 65.4 53.5 Specific 98.1 97.2 98.2 46.5 13

Adding Constraints So far, we have been looking at unconstrained optimizations What if there are constraints? Conventional wisdom: constraints act to limit the error-maximizing behavior of optimization Consider the case in which a manager constrains J characteristics of an (active) portfolio with N assets to be exactly zero by imposing the constraints: Ah = 0 14

Adding Constraints These equality constraints effectively reduce the number of variables in the problem, since they enable us to write the optimization problem in terms of N-J assets, rather than N, as follows: In turn, this generally reduces the forecasting bias Since factor risk is Ah = A h + A h = J J J 1 J ( N J) ( N J) 1 0 1 J 1 J J J ( N J) ( N J) 1 h = A A h J ( N J) When we constrain a factor, say i, we set Q w Fw Effectively drops a variable from the problem w i = Moreover, drops it from the factor risk, which is the principal source of forecasting bias 0. 15

Adding Constraints: Simulations Rerun simulations: Case 1: Constrain all factor exposures to be zero, except for the three factors comprising the alpha Case 2: Add long-only constraint Risk Model Factor Neutral Long only Active Risk 3% Risk Forecast over Truth (% ) Stock Selection Ratio of Component to Active Variance (% ) Forecast over Truth (% ) Factor Tilt Ratio of Component to Active Variance (% ) Active Variance 98.2 100.0 95.6 100.0 Factor -- 0.0 93.2 54.2 Specific 98.2 100.0 98.2 45.8 Active Variance 95.9 100.0 89.3 100.0 Factor 84.4 19.7 81.1 52.5 Specific 98.7 80.3 98.5 47.5 16

Conclusion Due to noise in the covariance matrix, portfolio optimization tends to produce portfolios for which the risk forecasts are underestimates of the true risk In the case in which the asset returns have a factor structure, using a factor-based covariance matrix mitigates the risk forecast bias significantly Furthermore, our analysis reveals that the bias in factor model risk forecasts may be significantly less than earlier estimates would suggest Finally, we discuss briefly how constraints mitigate the forecast bias 17

References Presentation is based on the paper: "Forecast Risk Bias in Optimized Portfolios", MSCI Barra Research Insight, October 2009 Bender, Lee, Stefek, Yao Additional citations: Barry, C. (1974), Portfolio Analysis Under Uncertain Means, Variances, and Covariances, Journal of Finance. Jorion, P. (1992), Portfolio Optimization in Practice, Financial Analyst Journal. Kritzman, M. (2006), Are Optimizers Error Maximizers? Journal of Portfolio Management, Summer 2006. Ledoit, O. and M. Wolf (2004), Honey I Shrunk the Sample Covariance Matrix Journal of Portfolio Management. Michaud, R. (1989), The Markowitz optimization enigma: Is optimized optimal? Financial Analysts Journal. 18

MSCI 24 Hour Global Client Service Americas Europe, Middle East & Africa Asia Pacific Americas 1.888.588.4567 (toll free) Amsterdam +31.20.462.1382 China North 10800.852.1032 (toll free) Atlanta +1.404.551.3212 Cape Town +27.21.673.0100 China South 10800.152.1032 (toll free) Boston +1.617.532.0920 Chicago +1.312.706.4999 Frankfurt +49.69.133.859.00 Geneva +41.22.817.9777 Hong Kong +852.2844.9333 Seoul +827.07688.8984 Monterrey +52.81.1253.4020 London +44.20.7618.2222 Singapore 800.852.3749 (toll free) Montreal +1.514.847.7506 New York +1.212.804.3901 Madrid +34.91.700.7275 Milan +39.02.5849.0415 Sydney +61.2.9033.9333 Tokyo +81.3.5226.8222 San Francisco +1.415.836.8800 Paris 0800.91.59.17 (toll free) São Paulo +55.11.3706.1360 Zurich +41.44.220.9300 Stamford +1.203.325.5630 Toronto +1.416.628.1007 clientservice@ www. www.riskmetrics.com Barra Knowledge Base Online Answers to Barra Questions: www.barra.com/support 19

Notice and Disclaimer This document and all of the information contained in it, including without limitation all text, data, graphs, charts (collectively, the Information ) is the property of MSCl Inc. or its subsidiaries (collectively, MSCI ), or MSCI s licensors, direct or indirect suppliers or any third party involved in making or compiling any Information (collectively, with MSCI, the Information Providers ) and is provided for informational purposes only. The Information may not be reproduced or redisseminated in whole or in part without prior written permission from MSCI. The Information may not be used to create derivative works or to verify or correct other data or information. For example (but without limitation), the Information many not be used to create indices, databases, risk models, analytics, software, or in connection with the issuing, offering, sponsoring, managing or marketing of any securities, portfolios, financial products or other investment vehicles utilizing or based on, linked to, tracking or otherwise derived from the Information or any other MSCI data, information, products or services. The user of the Information assumes the entire risk of any use it may make or permit to be made of the Information. NONE OF THE INFORMATION PROVDERS MAKES ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES OR REPRESENTATIONS WITH RESPECT TO THE INFORMATION (OR THE RESULTS TO BE OBTAINED BY THE USE THEREOF), AND TO THE MAXIMUM EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW, EACH INFORMATION PROVIDER EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL IMPLIED WARRANTIES (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF ORIGINALITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, NON-INFRINGEMENT, COMPLETENESS, MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE) WITH RESPECT TO ANY OF THE INFORMATION. Without limiting any of the foregoing and to the maximum extent permitted by applicable law, in no event shall any Information Provider have any liability regarding any of the Information for any direct, indirect, special, punitive, consequential (including lost profits) or any other damages even if notified of the possibility of such damages. The foregoing shall not exclude or limit any liability that may not by applicable law be excluded or limited, including without limitation (as applicable), any liability for death or personal injury to the extent that such injury results from the negligence or wilful default of itself, its servants, agents or sub-contractors. Information containing any historical information, data or analysis should not be taken as an indication or guarantee of any future performance, analysis, forecast or prediction. Past performance does not guarantee future results. None of the Information constitutes an offer to sell (or a solicitation of an offer to buy), any security, financial product or other investment vehicle or any trading strategy. MSCI s indirect wholly-owned subsidiary Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc. ( ISS ) is a Registered Investment Adviser under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. Except with respect to any applicable products or services from ISS (including applicable products or services from MSCI ESG Research Information, which are provided by ISS), none of MSCI s products or services recommends, endorses, approves or otherwise expresses any opinion regarding any issuer, securities, financial products or instruments or trading strategies and none of MSCI s products or services is intended to constitute investment advice or a recommendation to make (or refrain from making) any kind of investment decision and may not be relied on as such. The MSCI ESG Indices use ratings and other data, analysis and information from MSCI ESG Research. MSCI ESG Research is produced by ISS or its subsidiaries. Issuers mentioned or included in any MSCI ESG Research materials may be a client of MSCI, ISS, or another MSCI subsidiary, or the parent of, or affiliated with, a client of MSCI, ISS, or another MSCI subsidiary, including ISS Corporate Services, Inc., which provides tools and services to issuers. MSCI ESG Research materials, including materials utilized in any MSCI ESG Indices or other products, have not been submitted to, nor received approval from, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission or any other regulatory body. Any use of or access to products, services or information of MSCI requires a license from MSCI. MSCI, Barra, RiskMetrics, ISS, CFRA, FEA, and other MSCI brands and product names are the trademarks, service marks, or registered trademarks or service marks of MSCI or its subsidiaries in the United States and other jurisdictions. The Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) was developed by and is the exclusive property of MSCI and Standard & Poor s. Global Industry Classification Standard (GICS) is a service mark of MSCI and Standard & Poor s. 2011 MSCI Inc. All rights reserved. 20