Benchmarking, portfolio insurance and technical analysis: a Monte Carlo comparison of dynamic strategies of asset allocation. (English) Zbl 1178.91175

Summary: This paper makes an extensive simulation comparison of popular dynamic strategies of asset allocation. For each strategy, alternative measures have been calculated for risk, return and risk-adjusted performance (Sharpe ratio, Sortino ratio, return at risk). Moreover, the strategies are compared in different market situations (bull, bear, no-trend markets) and with different market volatility, taking into account transaction costs and discrete rebalancing of portfolios. The simulations show a dominant role of constant proportion strategies in bear and no-trend markets and a preference for benchmarking strategies in bull markets. These results are independent of the volatility level and the risk-adjusted measure adopted.


91G10 Portfolio theory
91G60 Numerical methods (including Monte Carlo methods)
91B30 Risk theory, insurance (MSC2010)


Full Text: DOI


[1] Bird, R.; Cunningham, R.; Dennis, D.; Tippett, M., Portfolio insurancea simulation under different market conditions, Insurance: mathematics and economics, 9, 1-19, (1990) · Zbl 0693.62084
[2] Black, F.; Jones, R., Simplifying portfolio insurance, Journal of portfolio management, 13, 48-51, (1987)
[3] Black, F.; Perold, A.F., Theory of constant portfolio insurance, Journal of economic dynamics and control, 16, 403-426, (1992) · Zbl 0825.90056
[4] Black, F.; Scholes, M., The pricing of options and corporate liabilities, Journal of political economy, 81, 637-654, (1973) · Zbl 1092.91524
[5] Brennan, M.J.; Schwartz, E.S., Time-invariant portfolio insurance strategies, Journal of finance, 43, 283-299, (1988)
[6] Brock, W.; Lakonishok, J.; LeBaron, B., Simple technical trading rules and the stochastic properties of stock returns, Journal of finance, 47, 1731-1764, (1992)
[7] Dybvig, P.H., Inefficient dynamic portfolio strategies or how to throw away a million dollars in the stock market, The review of financial studies, 1, 67-88, (1988)
[8] Etzioni, E.S., Rebalance disciplines for portfolio insurance, Journal of portfolio management, 12, 59-62, (1986)
[9] Fama, E.F.; Blume, M.E., Filter rules and stock market trading, Journal of business, 39, 226-241, (1966)
[10] Hamilton, W.D., The stock market barometer, (1922), Harper New York
[11] Jensen, M.C.; Bennington, G.A., Random walks and technical theoriessome additional evidence, Journal of finance, 25, 469-482, (1970)
[12] Leland, H.E., Option pricing and replication with transaction costs, The journal of finance, 40, 1283-1301, (1985)
[13] Leland, H.E.; Rubinstein, M., Replicating options with positions in stocks and cash, Financial analysts journal, 37, 63-72, (1981)
[14] Leland, H.E., Rubinstein, M., 1988. The evolution of portfolio insurance. In: Luskin, D.L. (Ed.), Portfolio Insurance. A Guide to Dynamic Hedging. Wiley, New York, pp. 3-10.
[15] Morgan, J.P., Riskmetrics—technical document, (1996), Morgan Guaranty Trust Company New York
[16] Pelsser, A., Vorst, T., 1994. Transaction costs and efficiency of portfolio strategies. Report 9423/A, Econometric Institute, Erasums University. · Zbl 0924.90023
[17] Perold, A.F.; Sharpe, W.F., Dynamic strategies for asset allocation, Financial analysts journal, 44, 16-27, (1988)
[18] Rhea, R., Dow theory, (1932), Barrons New York
[19] Rubinstein, M., Portfolio insurance and the market crash, Financial analysts journal, 44, 38-47, (1988)
[20] Sullivan, R.; Timmermann, A.; White, H., Data-snooping, technical trading rule performance and the bootstrap, Journal of finance, 54, 1647-1691, (1999)
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. It attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming the completeness or perfect precision of the matching.