The allocation of asset which is reasonable and effective will increase investors' wealth, and promote their consumption. This will give impetus to the development of social economy. As is known to all, the asset structure is determined by the choice of asset allocation strategy. Moreover, the constraint of borrowing and policy restriction also have significant influence on asset allocation.
Based on previous research, 10 typical asset allocation strategies under the frame of Mean-Variance Model are chosen, including equity weight strategy, improved mean-variance strategies, improved Bayesian models, and improved CAPM strategies. In this paper, these asset allocation strategies using actual data of 5 categories of most common assets in Chinese capital market are studied, which contains stocks, debts, funds, gold and real assets ranging from 2000 to 2015. All performance of these 10 strategies with and without the constraint of borrowing is also studied and compared. The empirical results with the actual asset allocations of Chinese investors are compared, and the drawbacks and unreasonable respects of the real allocations are pointed out. The result provides some corresponding improvement suggestions.
The empirical results of this paper show that since the estimation error is the largest in the capital market, the performance of theoretical optimal asset allocation is not as good as the performance of equity weight strategy. In the meanwhile, the optimal asset allocation is dominant to the equity weight strategy in the case of financial market because the estimation error is the smallest. Furthermore, the constraint of borrowing will restrain the effect of asset allocation strategies, especially in the case that gold and real assets are all included in our investment scope. First, the current investment scope of Chinese investors is too small. Investment diversification can not only increase the effect of asset allocation, but also promote the development of the market. Second, the constraint of borrowing indeed restrain the abnormal fluctuation of the market in the short term, and it will affect the asset allocation and the development of the market negatively in the long term. So the government should relax restriction, introduce more investment products and increase market depth and elasticity to attract and guide more investors into the market.
In the last part of this paper, the performance of the strategies of mean-variance and equity weight is analyzed by using the data of 4 kinds of common assets and employing the method of Monte Carlo Simulation. The result makes a further support to our previous conclusion.
WU Wen-sheng, SHENG Shi-jie, HAN Qi-heng
. Variable Mean and Variance of Asset Allocation Model in Chinese Market[J]. Chinese Journal of Management Science, 2018
, 26(2)
: 107
-115
.
DOI: 10.16381/j.cnki.issn1003-207x.2018.02.012
[1] BrinsonGP,Hood LR, Beebower G L.Determinants of portfolio performance. Financial Analyst Journal,1986, 42(4):39-44.
[2] Ibbotson R G, Kaplan P D. Does allocation explain 40, 90 or 100 percent of performance?. Financial Analyst Journal,2000, 56(1):26-33.
[3] Markowitz H M. Portfolio selection. Journal of Finance, 1952, 7(1):77-91.
[4] Merton R C. On estimating the expected return on the market:An exploratory investigation. Journal of FinancialEconomics, 1980, 8(4):323-361.
[5] 杨朝军, 陈浩武.参数不确定性对投资者最优资产组合的影响:基于中国的实证. 中国管理科学,2008,16(3):37-43.
[6] 韩其恒,吴文生,曹志广.资产配置模型在中国真的有效吗. 经济管理, 2016, 38(3):124-134.
[7] Kan R, Zhou Guofu. Optimal portfolio choice with parameter uncertainty. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 2007, 42(3):621-656.
[8] Barry C B.Portfolio analysis under uncertain means, variances and covariances. Journal of Finance, 1974, 29(2):515-522.
[9] Jobson J D, Korkie R. Estimation for Markowitz efficient portfolios. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 1980,37(7):544-554.
[10] MacKinlay A C, Pastor L. Asset pricing models:Implications for expected returns and portfolio selection. The Review of Financial Studies, 2000, 13(4):883-916.
[11] Liu Wei, Kolari J W, Huang Jianhua. A new asset pricing model based on the zero-beta CAPM[R]. Working Paper, National Bureau of Economics Research,2013.
[12] Choueifaty Y, Coignard Y. Toward maximum diversification.The Journal of Portfolio Management, 2008, 35(1):79-91.
[13] Maillard S, Roncalli T, Teiletche J. On the properties of equally-weighted risk contributions portfolios. The Journal of Portfolio Management, 2010, 36(3):60-70.
[14] Bloomfield T R, Leftwich J L. Portfolio strategies and performance. Journal of Financial Economics, 1977, 5(2):201-218.
[15] Jorion P. Bayesian and CAPM estimators of the means:implications for portfolio selection. Journal of Banking and Finance, 1991, 15(3):717-727.
[16] DeMiguel V, Garlappi L, Uppal R. Optimal versus naive diversification:How inefficient is the 1/N portfolio strategy. The Review of Financial Studies, 2009, 22(5):937-974.
[17] 吴世农, 韦绍永. 上海股市投资组合规模和风险关系的实证研究. 经济研究, 1998, (4):21-29.
[18] 赵大萍, 张超梁,房勇,基于贝叶斯理论的长短数据资产组合选择.中国管理科学, 2015,23(S1):504-509.
[19] 何朝林, 均值-方差模型具有一般不确定下的最优资产组合选择.中国管理科学, 2015,23(12):63-70.
[20] 凌爱凡, 杨晓光, 唐乐. 具有多元权值约束的鲁棒LPM积极投资组合.管理科学学报, 2013, 16(8):31-46.
[21] 黄金波,李仲飞. 分布不确定下的风险对冲策略及其效用. 中国管理科学, 2017,25(1):1-10.
[22] Campbell J Y, Thompson S B. Predicting excess stock returns out of sample:Can anything beat historical averge?. Review of Financial Studies, 2008, 21(4):1509-1531.