Intertemporal asset allocation: A comparison of methods

被引:11
|
作者
Detemple, J
Garcia, R
Rindisbacher, M
机构
[1] Boston Univ, Sch Management, Boston, MA 02215 USA
[2] Univ Montreal, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[3] Univ Toronto, Rotman Sch Management, Toronto, ON, Canada
[4] CIRANO, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[5] CIREQ, Montreal, PQ, Canada
关键词
asset allocation; Monte Carlo methods; Malliavin derivatives; regression method;
D O I
10.1016/j.jbankfin.2005.02.004
中图分类号
F8 [财政、金融];
学科分类号
0202 ;
摘要
This paper compares two recent Monte Carlo methods advocated for the computation of optimal portfolio rules. The candidate methods are the approach based on Monte Carlo with Malliavin Derivatives (MCMD) proposed by Detemple, Garcia and Rindisbacher [Detemple et al., 2003. A Monte-Carlo method for optimal portfolios. Journal of Finance 58, 401-406] and the approach based on Monte Carlo with regression (MCR) of Brandt, Goyal, Santa-Clara and Stroud [Brandt et al., 2003. A simulation approach to dynamic portfolio choice with an application to learning about return predictability. Working paper, Wharton School]. Our comparisons are carried out in the context of various intertemporal portfolio choice problems with two assets, a risky asset and a riskless asset, and different configurations of the state variables. The specifications studied include a linear model with a single state variable admitting an exact solution and a non-linear model with two state variables that requires a purely numerical resolution. The accuracies of the candidate methods are compared. We provide, in particular, efficiency plots displaying the speed-accuracy trade-off for various selections of the relevant simulation and discretization parameters. MCMD is shown to dominate in all the settings considered. (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:2821 / 2848
页数:28
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Commodity futures return predictability and intertemporal asset pricing
    Cotter, John
    Eyiah-Donkor, Emmanuel
    Poti, Valerio
    [J]. JOURNAL OF COMMODITY MARKETS, 2023, 31
  • [42] The trouble with asset allocation
    Topkis, M
    [J]. FORTUNE, 1997, 136 (07) : 206 - +
  • [43] Asset Allocation in Bankruptcy
    Bernstein, Shai
    Colonnelli, Emanuele
    Iverson, Benjamin
    [J]. JOURNAL OF FINANCE, 2019, 74 (01): : 5 - 53
  • [44] Consensus consumer and intertemporal asset pricing with heterogeneous beliefs
    Jouini, Elyes
    Napp, Clotilde
    [J]. REVIEW OF ECONOMIC STUDIES, 2007, 74 (04): : 1149 - 1174
  • [45] GHAUS asset allocation
    Estrada J.
    [J]. Journal of Asset Management, 2016, 17 (1) : 1 - 9
  • [46] ASSET ALLOCATION AND OPTIONS
    EVNINE, J
    HENRIKSSON, R
    [J]. JOURNAL OF PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT, 1987, 14 (01): : 56 - 61
  • [47] Robust asset allocation
    Tütüncü, RH
    Koenig, M
    [J]. ANNALS OF OPERATIONS RESEARCH, 2004, 132 (1-4) : 157 - 187
  • [48] An asset allocation puzzle
    Canner, N
    Mankiw, NG
    Weil, DN
    [J]. AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW, 1997, 87 (01): : 181 - 191
  • [49] Dynamic asset allocation
    Madhogarhia P.K.
    Lam M.
    [J]. Journal of Asset Management, 2015, 16 (5) : 293 - 302
  • [50] Strategic asset allocation
    Brennan, MJ
    Schwartz, ES
    Lagnado, R
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ECONOMIC DYNAMICS & CONTROL, 1997, 21 (8-9): : 1377 - 1403