Distributionally Robust Portfolio Optimization under Marginal and Copula Ambiguity
Abstract We investigate a new family of distributionally robust optimization problem under marginal and copula ambiguity with applications to portfolio optimization problems. The proposed model considers the ambiguity set of portfolio returns in which the marginal distributions and their copula are close—in terms of the Wasserstein distance—to their nominal counterparts. We develop a cutting-surface method to solve the proposed problem, in which the distribution separation subproblem is nonconvex and includes bilinear terms. We propose three approaches to solve the bilinear formulation, namely (1) linear relaxation via McCormick inequalities, (2) exact mixed-integer linear program reformulation via disjunctive inequalities, and (3) inner approximation method via a novel iterative procedure that exploits the structural properties of the bilinear optimization problem. We further carry out a comprehensive set of computational experiments with distributionally robust portfolios featuring Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) measures. These tests aim to compare the accuracy of the proposed algorithms, analyze the impact of the radius of the Wasserstein ambiguity ball on the portfolio, and assess portfolio performance. We use a rolling-horizon approach to conduct the out-of-sample tests, which show the superior performance of the portfolios under marginal and copula ambiguity over the equally weighted and ambiguity-free Mean-CVaR benchmark portfolios.
Authors
- Ran Ji (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5797-0153)
- Miguel A. Lejeune (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6952-7212)
- Zhengyang Fan
Institutions
- George Mason University (US)
- George Washington University (US)
- Decision Sciences (United States) (US)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications
- Published
- 2024-10-12
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s10957-024-02550-y
- Citations
- 7
- Primary Topic
- Risk and Portfolio Optimization
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 3.43