Comparison of the Applicability of Markowitz Model and Index Model Under 5 Real-World Constraints for Diverse Investors
These authors contributed equally.
- DOI
- 10.2991/assehr.k.211209.216How to use a DOI?
- Keywords
- Investment Management; Optimal Portfolio; Markowitz Model; Index Model; Investment Constraints
- Abstract
A notable trend observed within our research is that, despite the variations in actual values, both models have agreed on the stocks that are given the most extreme weights, either positive or negative. While the rest of the stocks, whose weights are closer than 0 and are used for nuanced balancing to arrive at the optimum, are allocated with significantly different weights as the models’ underlying computations of standard deviation differ. Under the conditions of C1 to C3, Markowitz Model consistently performs better in predicting minimum variance portfolio, while Index Model is particularly apt at forecasting maximum Sharpe ratio portfolio. Such discrepancies, however, disappear under C4 and C5, where the Index Model claims greater potency in predicting both portfolios. However, their relative advantages over each other are never so significant under any constraint to demonstrate a consequential superiority hence arriving at an assertive conclusion. Nevertheless, our results may still provide an insight into the portfolio construction for diversified customers with multifarious optimization goals under eclectic circumstances.
- Copyright
- © 2021 The Authors. Published by Atlantis Press International B.V.
- Open Access
- This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC license.
Cite this article
TY - CONF AU - Ke Qu AU - Yi Tian AU - Jingying Xu AU - Jiefu Zhang PY - 2021 DA - 2021/12/15 TI - Comparison of the Applicability of Markowitz Model and Index Model Under 5 Real-World Constraints for Diverse Investors BT - Proceedings of the 2021 3rd International Conference on Economic Management and Cultural Industry (ICEMCI 2021) PB - Atlantis Press SP - 1323 EP - 1332 SN - 2352-5428 UR - https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.211209.216 DO - 10.2991/assehr.k.211209.216 ID - Qu2021 ER -