Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Can Robust Optimization Offer Improved Portfolio Performance? An Empirical Study of Indian market

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Quantitative Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The emergence of robust optimization has been driven primarily by the necessity to address the demerits of the Markowitz model. There has been a noteworthy debate regarding consideration of robust approaches as superior or at par with the Markowitz model, in terms of portfolio performance. In order to address this skepticism, we perform empirical analysis of three robust optimization models, namely the ones based on box, ellipsoidal and separable uncertainty sets. We conclude that robust approaches can be considered as a viable alternative to the Markowitz model, not only in simulated data but also in a real market setup, involving the Indian indices of S&P BSE 30 and S&P BSE 100. Finally, we offer qualitative and quantitative justification regarding the practical usefulness of robust optimization approaches from the point of view of number of stocks, sample size and types of data.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Best, M.J., and R.R. Grauer. 1991. On the sensitivity of mean-variance-efficient portfolios to changes in asset means: some analytical and computational results. The Review of Financial Studies 4 (2): 315–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Broadie, M. 1993. Computing efficient frontiers using estimated parameters. Annals of Operations Research 45 (1): 21–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ceria, S., and R.A. Stubbs. 2006. Incorporating estimation errors into portfolio selection: Robust portfolio construction. Journal of Asset Management 7 (2): 109–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chopra, V.K., and W.T. Ziemba. 1993. The effect of errors in means, variances, and covariances on optimal portfolio choice. The Journal of Portfolio Management 19 (2): 6–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeMiguel, V., and F.J. Nogales. 2009. Portfolio selection with robust estimation. Operations Research 57 (3): 560–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fabozzi, F.J., P.N. Kolm, D. Pachamanova, and S.M. Focardi. 2007. Robust Portfolio Optimization and Management. New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halldorsson, B.V., and R.H. Tütüncü. 2003. An interior-point method for a class of saddle-point problems. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 116 (3): 559–590.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, J.H., W.C. Kim, and F.J. Fabozzi. 2014. Recent developments in robust rortfolios with a worst-case approach. Journal of Optimization Theory and Applications 161 (1): 103–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lu, Z. (2006). A new cone programming approach for robust portfolio selection. Technical report, Department of Mathematics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, BC.

  • Markowitz, H.M. 1952. Portfolio selection. The Journal of Finance 7 (1): 77–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Markowitz, H.M. 1959. Portfolio Selection: Efficient Diversification of Investments. Yale: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Michaud, R.O. 1989. The Markowitz optimization enigma: is ’optimized’ optimal? Financial Analysts Journal 45 (1): 31–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reserve Bank of India. (2020). Weekly Statistical Supplement. https://www.rbi.org.in/scripts/WSSViewDetail.aspx?TYPE=Section&PARAM1=4%0A

  • Santos, A.A.P. 2010. The out-of-sample performance of robust portfolio optimization. Brazilian Review of Finance 8 (2): 141–166.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Scherer, B. 2007. Can robust portfolio optimization help to build better portfolios? Journal of Asset Management 7 (6): 374–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tütüncü, R.H., and M. Koenig. 2004. Robust asset allocation. Annals of Operations Research 132 (1–4): 157–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VRO. (2020). Portfolios: do number of stocks matter? Value Research Online.https://www.valueresearchonline.com/story/h2_storyView.asp?str=200396&fbclid=IwAR3YkUaNLCY3keZGXfooehh0WU90zkZ5s94h0Uazj1-rzOFSy5bw6R1E-MY

  • Yahoo Finance. (2020). https://in.finance.yahoo.com/

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Technology Guwahati, Guwahati, Assam, 781039, India

    Shashank Oberoi, Mohammed Bilal Girach & Siddhartha P. Chakrabarty

Authors
  1. Shashank Oberoi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mohammed Bilal Girach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Siddhartha P. Chakrabarty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Siddhartha P. Chakrabarty.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Oberoi, S., Girach, M.B. & Chakrabarty, S.P. Can Robust Optimization Offer Improved Portfolio Performance? An Empirical Study of Indian market. J. Quant. Econ. 18, 611–630 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40953-020-00205-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40953-020-00205-z

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation