Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints Carole Bernard

SAFI 2011, Ann Arbor, May 2011.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

1/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

I This talk is joint work with Phelim Boyle (Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Canada) and with Steven Vanduffel (Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Belgium).

I Outline of the talk: 1

Characterization of optimal investment strategies for an investor with law-invariant preferences and a fixed investment horizon

2

Extension to the case when investors have state-dependent constraints.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

2/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

I This talk is joint work with Phelim Boyle (Wilfrid Laurier University, Waterloo, Canada) and with Steven Vanduffel (Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Belgium).

I Outline of the talk: 1

Characterization of optimal investment strategies for an investor with law-invariant preferences and a fixed investment horizon

2

Extension to the case when investors have state-dependent constraints.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

2/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Part I: Optimal portfolio selection for law-invariant investors Characterization of optimal investment strategies for an investor with law-invariant preferences and a fixed investment horizon • Optimal strategies are “cost-efficient”. • Cost-efficiency ⇔ Minimum correlation with the state-price

process ⇔ Anti-monotonicity

• Explicit representations of the cheapest and most expensive

strategies to achieve a given distribution. • In the Black-Scholes setting, I Optimality of strategies increasing in ST . I Suboptimality of path-dependent contracts.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

3/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Main Assumptions • Consider an arbitrage-free market.

• Given a strategy with payoff XT at time T . There exists Q, such that its price at 0 is c(XT ) = EQ [e −rT XT ] • P (“physical measure”) and Q (“risk-neutral measure”) are two equivalent probability measures:   dQ −rT ξT = e , c(XT ) =EQ [e −rT XT ] = EP [ξT XT ]. dP T We assume that all market participants agree on the state-price process ξT . Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

4/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Cost-efficient strategies A strategy (or a payoff) is cost-efficient if any other strategy that generates the same distribution under P costs at least as much. • Given a strategy with payoff XT at time T and cdf F under the physical measure P. The distributional price is defined as PD(F ) =

min

{Y | Y ∼F }

{E [ξT Y ]} =

min

{Y | Y ∼F }

c(Y )

• The strategy with payoff XT is cost-efficient if PD(F ) = c(XT ) Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

5/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Cost-efficient strategies A strategy (or a payoff) is cost-efficient if any other strategy that generates the same distribution under P costs at least as much. • Given a strategy with payoff XT at time T and cdf F under the physical measure P. The distributional price is defined as PD(F ) =

min

{Y | Y ∼F }

{E [ξT Y ]} =

min

{Y | Y ∼F }

c(Y )

• The strategy with payoff XT is cost-efficient if PD(F ) = c(XT ) Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

5/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Cost-efficient strategies A strategy (or a payoff) is cost-efficient if any other strategy that generates the same distribution under P costs at least as much. • Given a strategy with payoff XT at time T and cdf F under the physical measure P. The distributional price is defined as PD(F ) =

min

{Y | Y ∼F }

{E [ξT Y ]} =

min

{Y | Y ∼F }

c(Y )

• The strategy with payoff XT is cost-efficient if PD(F ) = c(XT ) Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

5/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Literature I Cox, J.C., Leland, H., 1982. “On Dynamic Investment Strategies,” Proceedings of the seminar on the Analysis of Security Prices, 26(2), U. of Chicago (published in 2000 in JEDC), 24(11-12), 1859-1880. I Dybvig, P., 1988a. “Distributional Analysis of Portfolio Choice,” Journal of Business, 61(3), 369-393. I Dybvig, P., 1988b. “Inefficient Dynamic Portfolio Strategies or How to Throw Away a Million Dollars in the Stock Market,” Review of Financial Studies, 1(1), 67-88.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

6/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Simple Illustration

Example of • XT ∼ YT under P • but with different costs

in a 2-period binomial tree. (T = 2)

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

7/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

A simple illustration for X2 , a payoff at T = 2 Real-world probabilities: p = 12 and risk neutral probabilities=q = 41 . p

p

S0 = 16

S 6 1 = 32

S 6 2 = 64

p

(

S1 = 8

1 16

X2 = 1

1 2

6 16

X2 = 2

1 4

9 16

X2 = 3

1−p

(

1−p

1 4

S 6 2 = 16

1−p

(

S2 = 4

U(1) + U(3) U(2) 3 + , PD = Cheapest = 4 2 2   1 6 9 = Price of X2 = + 2+ 3 , Efficiency cost = PX2 − PD 16 16 16 E [U(X2 )] =

PX2

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

8/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Y2 , a payoff at T = 2 distributed as X2 Real-world probabilities: p = 12 and risk neutral probabilities: q = 14 . p

p

S0 = 16

S 6 1 = 32

S 6 2 = 64

p

(

S1 = 8

1 16

Y2 = 3

1 2

6 16

Y2 = 2

1 4

9 16

Y2 = 1

1−p

(

1−p

1 4

S 6 2 = 16

1−p

(

S2 = 4

U(3) + U(1) U(2) 3 + , PD = Cheapest = 4 2 2 X2 and Y2 have the same distribution under the physical measure   1 6 9 = Price of X2 = + 2+ 3 , Efficiency cost = PX2 − PD 16 16 16 E [U(Y2 )] =

PX2

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

9/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

X2 , a payoff at T = 2 Real-world probabilities: p = 12 and risk neutral probabilities: q = 14 . q

q

S0 = 16

S 6 1 = 32

S 6 2 = 64

q

(

S1 = 8

S 6 2 = 16

U(1) + U(3) U(2) E [U(X2 )] = + 4 2  Carole Bernard

X2 = 1

1 2

6 16

X2 = 2

1 4

9 16

X2 = 3

1−q

(

c(X2 ) = Price of X2 =

1 16

1−q

(

1−q

1 4

S2 = 4

 ,

PD = Cheapest =

 1 6 9 5 + 2+ 3 = 16 16 16 2

,

 1 6 9 3 3+ 2+ 1 = 16 16 16 2

Efficiency cost = PX2 − PD

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

10/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Y2 , a payoff at T = 2 Real-world probabilities: p = 12 and risk neutral probabilities: q = 14 . q

q

S0 = 16

S 6 1 = 32

S 6 2 = 64

q

(

S1 = 8

S 6 2 = 16

S2 = 4

U(1) + U(3) U(2) E [U(X2 )] = + 4 2  Carole Bernard

Y2 = 3

1 2

6 16

Y2 = 2

1 4

9 16

Y2 = 1

1−q

(

c(X2 ) = Price of X2 =

1 16

1−q

(

1−q

1 4

 ,

c(Y2 ) =

 1 6 9 5 + 2+ 3 = 16 16 16 2

1 6 9 3+ 2+ 1 16 16 16

 =

3 2

Efficiency cost = PX2 − PD

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

11/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Traditional Approach to Portfolio Selection Consider an investor with increasing law-invariant preferences and a fixed horizon. Denote by XT the investor’s final wealth. • Optimize a law-invariant objective function 1 max (EP [U(XT )]) where U is increasing. XT

2 3

Minimizing Value-at-Risk Probability target maximizing: max P(XT > K) XT

4

...

• for a given cost (budget)

cost at 0 = EQ [e −rT XT ] = EP [ξT XT ] Find optimal strategy XT∗ Carole Bernard

⇒ Optimal cdf F of XT∗ Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

12/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Traditional Approach to Portfolio Selection Consider an investor with increasing law-invariant preferences and a fixed horizon. Denote by XT the investor’s final wealth. • Optimize a law-invariant objective function 1 max (EP [U(XT )]) where U is increasing. XT

2 3

Minimizing Value-at-Risk Probability target maximizing: max P(XT > K) XT

4

...

• for a given cost (budget)

cost at 0 = EQ [e −rT XT ] = EP [ξT XT ] Find optimal strategy XT∗ Carole Bernard

⇒ Optimal cdf F of XT∗ Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

12/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Our Approach Consider an investor with • Law-invariant preferences • Increasing preferences • A fixed investment horizon

The optimal strategy must be cost-efficient. Therefore XT? in the previous slide is cost-efficient. Our approach: We characterize cost-efficient strategies (This characterization can then be used to solve optimal portfolio problems by restricting the set of possible strategies).

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

13/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Our Approach Consider an investor with • Law-invariant preferences • Increasing preferences • A fixed investment horizon

The optimal strategy must be cost-efficient. Therefore XT? in the previous slide is cost-efficient. Our approach: We characterize cost-efficient strategies (This characterization can then be used to solve optimal portfolio problems by restricting the set of possible strategies).

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

13/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Our Approach Consider an investor with • Law-invariant preferences • Increasing preferences • A fixed investment horizon

The optimal strategy must be cost-efficient. Therefore XT? in the previous slide is cost-efficient. Our approach: We characterize cost-efficient strategies (This characterization can then be used to solve optimal portfolio problems by restricting the set of possible strategies).

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

13/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Sufficient Condition for Cost-efficiency A subset A of R2 is anti-monotonic if for any (x1 , y1 ) and (x2 , y2 ) ∈ A, (x1 − x2 )(y1 − y2 ) 6 0. A random pair (X , Y ) is anti-monotonic if there exists an anti-monotonic set A of R2 such that P((X , Y ) ∈ A) = 1. Theorem (Sufficient condition for cost-efficiency) Any random payoff XT with the property that (XT , ξT ) is anti-monotonic is cost-efficient. Note the absence of additional assumptions on ξT (it holds in discrete and continuous markets) and on XT (no assumption on non-negativity). Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

14/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Idea of the proof Minimizing the price c(XT ) = E [ξT XT ] when XT ∼ F amounts to finding the dependence structure that minimizes the correlation between the strategy and the state-price process min E [ξT XT ] XT  XT ∼ F subject to ξT ∼ G Recall that corr(XT , ξT ) =

E[ξT XT ] − E[ξT ]E[XT ] . std(ξT ) std(XT )

We can prove that when the distributions for both XT and ξT are fixed, we have (XT , ξT ) is anti-monotonic ⇒ corr[XT , ξT ] is minimal. Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

15/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Explicit Representation for Cost-efficiency Theorem Consider the following optimization problem: PD(F ) =

min

{XT | XT ∼F }

E[ξT XT ]

Assume ξT is continuously distributed, then the optimal strategy is XT? = F −1 (1 − Fξ (ξT )) . Note that X ? ∼ F and X ? is a.s. unique such that T

T

PD(F ) = c(XT? ) = E[ξT XT? ]

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

16/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Idea of the proof (1/2) Solving this problem amounts to finding bounds on copulas! min E [ξT XT ] XT  XT ∼ F subject to ξT ∼ G The distribution G is known and depends on the financial market. Let C denote a copula for (ξT , X ). Z Z E[ξT X ] =

(1 − G (ξ) − F (x) + C (G (ξ), F (x)))dxdξ,

(1)

Bounds for E[ξT X ] are derived from bounds on C max(u + v − 1, 0) 6 C (u, v ) 6 min(u, v ) (Fr´echet-Hoeffding Bounds for copulas) Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

17/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Idea of the proof (2/2) Consider a strategy with payoff XT distributed as F . We define F −1 as follows: F −1 (y ) = min {x / F (x) > y } . Let Z = FZ−1 (U), then E [FZ−1 (U) FX−1 (1 − U)] 6 E [FZ−1 (U) X ] 6 E [FZ−1 (U) FX−1 (U)] In our setting, the cost of the strategy with payoff XT is c(XT ) = E [ξT XT ]. Then, assuming that ξT is continuously distributed, E [ξT FX−1 (1 − Fξ (ξT ))] 6 c(XT ) 6 E [ξT FX−1 (Fξ (ξT ))] Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

18/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Maximum price = Least efficient payoff Theorem Consider the following optimization problem: max

{XT | XT ∼F }

E[ξT XT ]

Assume ξT is continuously distributed. The unique strategy ZT? that generates the same distribution as F with the highest cost can be described as follows: ZT? = F −1 (Fξ (ξT ))

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

19/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Path-dependent payoffs are inefficient Corollary To be cost-efficient, the payoff of the derivative has to be of the following form: XT? = F −1 (1 − Fξ (ξT )) It becomes a European derivative written on ST when the state-price process ξT can be expressed as a function of ST . Thus path-dependent derivatives are in general not cost-efficient. Corollary Consider a derivative with a payoff XT which could be written as XT = h(ξT ) Then XT is cost efficient if and only if h is non-increasing. Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

20/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Black-Scholes Model Under the physical measure P, dSt = µdt + σdWtP St Then ξT = e θ

σ2

−rT



dQ dP



 =a

ST S0

−b

θ2

where a = e σ (µ− 2 )t−(r + 2 )t and b = µ−r . σ2 To be cost-efficient, the contract has to be a European derivative written on ST and non-decreasing w.r.t. ST (when µ > r ). In this case, XT? = F −1 (FST (ST )) Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

21/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Geometric Asian contract in Black-Scholes model Assume a strike K . The payoff of the Geometric Asian call is given by  1 RT + XT = e T 0 ln(St )dt − K which corresponds in the discrete case to

 Q

n k=1 S kT n

1

n

+ −K

.

The efficient payoff that is distributed as the payoff XT is a power call option   √ K + 1/ 3 ? − XT = d ST d 1− √1 S0 3 e



q   2 1 µ− σ2 T 3

1 − 2

where d := Similar result in the discrete case. Carole Bernard

.

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

22/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Example: Discrete Geometric Option 120 100

Payoff

80 60

Z*T

40 Y*T

20 0 40

60

80

100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 Stock Price at maturity ST

With σ = 20%, µ = 9%, r = 5%, S0 = 100, T = 1 year, K = 100, n = 12. C (XT? ) = 5.77 < Price(geometric Asian) = 5.94 < C (ZT? ) = 9.03. Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

23/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Put option in Black-Scholes model Assume a strike K . The payoff of the put is given by LT = (K − ST )+ . The payout that has the lowest cost and that has the same distribution as the put option payoff is given by  YT? = FL−1 (FST (ST )) = K −

S02 e

  2 2 µ− σ2 T

ST

+  .

This type of power option “dominates” the put option.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

24/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Cost-efficient payoff of a put cost efficient payoff that gives same payoff distrib as the put option 100

80 Put option

Payoff

60

Y* Best one

40

20

0 0

100

200

300

400

500

ST

With σ = 20%, µ = 9%, r = 5%, S0 = 100, T = 1 year, K = 100. Distributional price of the put = 3.14 Price of the put = 5.57 Efficiency loss for the put = 5.57-3.14= 2.43 Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

25/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Explaining the Demand for Inefficient Payoffs 1

2 3 4

5

Other sources of uncertainty: Stochastic interest rates or stochastic volatility Transaction costs, frictions Intermediary consumption. Often we are looking at an isolated contract: the theory applies to the complete portfolio. State-dependent needs • Background risk: • Hedging a long position in the market index ST (background risk) by purchasing a put option, • the background risk can be path-dependent. • Stochastic benchmark or other constraints: If the investor

wants to outperform a given (stochastic) benchmark Γ such that: P {ω ∈ Ω / WT (ω) > Γ(ω)} > α. Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

26/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Part 2: Investment with State-Dependent Constraints Problem considered so far min

E [ξT XT ] .

{XT | XT ∼F }

A payoff that solves this problem is cost-efficient. New Problem min

{YT | YT ∼F , S}

E [ξT YT ] .

where S denotes a set of constraints. A payoff that solves this problem is called a S−constrained cost-efficient payoff.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

27/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

How to formulate “state-dependent constraints”? YT and ST have given distributions. I The investor wants to ensure a minimum when the market falls P(YT > 100 | ST < 95) = 0.8. This provides some additional information on the joint distribution between YT and ST ⇒ information on the joint distribution of (ξT , YT ) in the Black-Scholes framework. I YT is decreasing in ST when the stock ST falls below some level (to justify the demand of a put option). I YT is independent of ST when ST falls below some level. All these constraints impose the strategy YT to pay out in given states of the world. Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

28/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Formally Goal: Find the cheapest possible payoff YT with the distribution F and which satisfies additional constraints of the form P(ξT 6 x, YT 6 y ) = Q(FξT (x), F (y )), with x > 0, y ∈ R and Q a given feasible function (for example a copula). Each constraint gives information on the dependence between the state-price ξT and YT and is, for a given function Q, determined by the pair (FξT (x), F (y )). Denote the finite or infinite set of all such constraints by S.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

29/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Sufficient condition for the existence Theorem Let t ∈ (0, T ). If there exists a copula L satisfying S such that L 6 C (pointwise) for all other copulas C satisfying S then the payoff YT? given by YT? = F −1 (f (ξT , ξt )) is a S-constrained cost-efficient payoff. Here f (ξT , ξt ) is given by  f (ξT , ξt ) = `Fξ

−1 h T

(ξT )

jFξ

T

i (F (ξ )) , (ξT ) ξt t

where the functions ju (v ) and `u (v ) are defined as the first partial derivative for (u, v ) → J(u, v ) and (u, v ) → L(u, v ) respectively and where J denotes the copula for the random pair (ξT , ξt ). If (U, V ) has a copula L then `u (v ) = P(V 6 v |U = u). Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

30/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Example 1: S = ∅ (no constraints) From the Fr´echet-Hoeffding bounds on copulas one has ∀(u, v ) ∈ [0, 1]2 ,

C (u, v ) > max (0, u + v − 1) .

Note that L(u, v ) := max (0, u + v − 1) is a copula. Then one obtains `u (v ) = 1 if v > 1 − u and that `u (v ) = 0 if v < 1 − u. Hence we find that `−1 u (p) = 1 − u for all 0 < p 6 1 which implies that f (ξt , ξT ) = 1 − FξT (ξT ). It follows that YT? is given by YT? = F −1 (1 − (FξT (ξT ))) Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

31/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Existence of the optimum ⇔ Existence of minimum copula Theorem (Sufficient condition for existence of a minimal copula L) Let S be an increasing and compact subset of [0, 1]2 . Then a minimal copula L(u, v ) satisfying S exists and is given by L(u, v ) = max {0, u + v − 1, K (u, v )} . where K (u, v ) = max(a,b)∈ S {Q(a, b) − (a − u)+ − (b − v )+ }. Proof in Tankov (2011, Journal of Applied Probability). Consequently the existence of a S−constrained cost-efficient payoff is guaranteed when S is increasing and compact.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

32/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Theorem (Case of one constraint) Assume that there is only one constraint (a, b) in S and let ϑ := Q(a, b), Then the minimum copula L is  L(u, v ) = max 0, u + v − 1, ϑ − (a − u)+ − (b − v )+ . The S−constrained cost-efficient payoff YT? exists and is unique. It can be expressed as YT? = F −1 (G (FξT (ξT ))) , where G : [0, 1] → [0, 1] is defined written as  1−u    a+b−ϑ−u G (u) = 1 +ϑ−u    1−u Carole Bernard

(2)

as G (u) = `−1 u (1) and can be if if if if

0 6 u 6 a − ϑ, a − ϑ < u 6 a, a < u 6 1 + ϑ − b, 1 + ϑ − b < u 6 1.

(3)

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

33/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Example 2: S contains 1 constraint Assume a Black-Scholes market. We suppose that the investor is looking for the payoff YT such that YT ∼ F (where F is the cdf of ST ) and satisfies the following constraint P(ST < 95, YT > 100) = 0.2. The optimal strategy, where a = 1 − FST (95), b = FST (100) and ϑ = 0.2 − FST (95) + FST (100) is given by the previous theorem. Its price is 100.2

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

34/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Example 2: Illustration Minimum Copula

Carole Bernard

Optimal Strategy

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

35/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Example 3: S is infinite A cost-efficient strategy with the same distribution F as ST but such that it is decreasing in ST when ST 6 ` is unique a.s. Its payoff is equal to YT? = F −1 [G (F (ST ))] , where G : [0, 1] → [0, 1] is given by  1−u if 0 6 u 6 F (`), G (u) = u − F (`) if F (`) < u 6 1. The constrained cost-efficient payoff can be written as YT? := F −1 [(1 − F (ST ))1ST <` + (F (ST ) − F (`)) 1ST >` ] . Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

36/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

250

200

Y*T

150

100

50

0 50

100

150 S

T

YT? as a function of ST . Parameters: ` = 100, S0 = 100, µ = 0.05, σ = 0.2, T = 1 and r = 0.03. The price is 103.4. Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

37/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Example 4: S is infinite A cost-efficient strategy with the same distribution F as ST but such that it is independent of ST when ST 6 ` can be constructed as     F (ST ) − F (`) ? −1 YT = F Φ (k(St , ST )) 1ST <` + 1ST >` , 1 − F (`) ! ln

where k(St , ST ) =

St t/T S T

−(1− Tt ) ln(S0 ) σ

q 2 t− tT

and t ∈ (0, T ) can be

chosen freely (No uniqueness and path-independence anymore).

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

38/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

10,000 realizations of YT? as a function of ST where ` = 100, S0 = 100, µ = 0.05, σ = 0.2, T = 1, r = 0.03 and t = T /2. Its price is 101.1 Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

39/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Conclusion • Cost-efficiency: a preference-free framework for ranking

different investment strategies. • Characterization of cost-efficient strategies. • For a given investment strategy, we derive an explicit

analytical expression for the cheapest and the most expensive strategies that have the same payoff distribution. • Optimal investment choice under state-dependent constraints.

In the presence of state-dependent constraints, optimal strategies • are not always non-decreasing with the stock price ST . • are not anymore unique and could be path-dependent.

Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

40/41

Introduction

Cost-Efficiency

Examples

State-Dependent Constraints

Conclusions

Further Research Directions / Work in Progress I Using cost-efficiency to derive bounds for insurance prices derived from indifference utility pricing (working paper on “Bounds for Insurance Prices” with Steven Vanduffel) I Extension to the presence of stochastic interest rates and application to executive compensation (work in progress with Jit Seng Chen and Phelim Boyle). I Further extend the work on state-dependent constraints: 1

Solve with expectations constraints between ξT and XT . E[gi (ξT , XT )] ∈ Ii

2

3

where Ii is an interval, possibly reduced to a single value. Solve with the probability constraint of outperforming a benchmark P(XT > h(ST )) > ε Extend the literature on optimal portfolio selection in specific models under state-dependent constraints.

Do not hesitate to contact me to get updated working papers! Carole Bernard

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

41/41

References I Bernard, C., Boyle P. 2010, “Explicit Representation of Cost-efficient Strategies”, available on SSRN. I Bernard, C., Maj, M., Vanduffel, S., 2011. “Improving the Design of Financial Products in a Multidimensional Black-Scholes Market,”, North American Actuarial Journal. I Bernard, C., Vanduffel, S., 2011. “Optimal Investment under Probability Constraints,” AfMath Proceedings. I Cox, J.C., Leland, H., 1982. “On Dynamic Investment Strategies,” Proceedings of the seminar on the Analysis of Security Prices,(published in 2000 in JEDC). I Dybvig, P., 1988a. “Distributional Analysis of Portfolio Choice,” Journal of Business. I Dybvig, P., 1988b. “Inefficient Dynamic Portfolio Strategies or How to Throw Away a Million Dollars in the Stock Market,” Review of Financial Studies. I Goldstein, D.G., Johnson, E.J., Sharpe, W.F., 2008. “Choosing Outcomes versus Choosing Products: Consumer-focused Retirement Investment Advice,” Journal of Consumer Research. I Jin, H., Zhou, X.Y., 2008. “Behavioral Portfolio Selection in Continuous Time,” Mathematical Finance. I Nelsen, R., 2006. “An Introduction to Copulas”, Second edition, Springer. I Pelsser, A., Vorst, T., 1996. “Transaction Costs and Efficiency of Portfolio Strategies,” European Journal of Operational Research. I Tankov, P., 2011. “Improved Frechet bounds and model-free pricing of multi-asset options,” Journal of Applied Probability, forthcoming. I Vanduffel, S., Chernih, A., Maj, M., Schoutens, W. 2009. “On the Suboptimality of Path-dependent Pay-offs in L´ evy markets”, Applied Mathematical Finance.

∼∼∼

Optimal Investment with State-Dependent Constraints

Increasing preferences. • A fixed investment horizon. The optimal strategy must be cost-efficient. Therefore X⋆. T in the previous slide is cost-efficient. Our approach: We characterize cost-efficient strategies. (This characterization can then be used to solve optimal portfolio problems by restricting the set of possible strategies).

2MB Sizes 0 Downloads 157 Views

Recommend Documents

Optimal Investment under Credit Constraint
We characterize the optimal investment decision, the financing and ...... [6] Dixit, A. and R. Pindyck, 1994, Investment under Uncertainty, Princeton University.

Optimal Borrowing Constraints, Growth and Savings in ...
Feb 23, 2012 - Such outcomes are at odds with a workhorse small open economy model, which would ... ensure that our results are not contaminated by business cycle .... Residential housing investment typically accounts for to 3%-8% of GDP and 15%- 30%

Boosting with pairwise constraints
Jul 16, 2009 - Department of Automation, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China. Abstract ...... straints that lead to the same surrogate function. Since we ...

Inducing Herding with Capacity Constraints
This paper shows that a firm may benefit from restricting capacity so as to trig- ger herding behaviour from consumers, in situations where such behavior is ...

Contractual Pricing with Incentive Constraints
integral part of a team's organization when individual behavior is subject to incen- tive compatibility. (Without incentive compatibility, there is no need for secrets.).

Learning with convex constraints
Unfortunately, the curse of dimensionality, especially in presence of many tasks, makes many complex real-world problems still hard to face. A possi- ble direction to attach those ..... S.: Calculus of Variations. Dover publications, Inc (1963). 5. G

String Constraints with Concatenation and Transducers Solved ...
path-queries for graph databases [Barceló et al. 2013; Barceló et al. 2012], which has ...... important for our purpose. However, the crucial point is that all queries that a DPLL(T) solver asks ...... In USENIX Security Symposium. http://static.us

Modeling Preferences with Availability Constraints
it focuses our attempt of prediction on the set of unavailable items, using ... For instance, a cable TV bundle is unlikely to contain all the channels that ... work in this area in two ways. First, in ... [8], music [9], Internet radio [10] and so o

Optimal investment under multiple defaults: a BSDE ...
Multiple defaults risk model. Optimal investment problem. Backward system of BSDEs. Numerical illustrations. Conclusion. Trading strategies and wealth process. Control problem. F-decomposition. Usual global approach (when all Ak are identical). • W

Optimal risk control and investment for Markov ...
Xin Zhanga †. Ming Zhoub. aSchool of ... Di Masi, Kabanov and Runggaldier (1994), Yao, Zhang, and Zhou (2001), Buffington and. Elliott (2002), Graziano and ...

Optimal Debt Maturity and Firm Investment - Barcelona GSE Events
Data on default rates is from Giesecke, Longstaff, ... To the best of our knowledge, firms' optimal maturity choice over the business ... In Gomes and Schmid (2016), firms are required to buy ...... moment is the debt recovery rate in bankruptcy.

Optimal investment taxes and efficient market provision ...
Feb 15, 2014 - interest rate R in the private retrade market and the level of income I that agents ... The illiquid, long-term asset pays nothing at t = 1 and ˆR > 1.

Robust Optimal Investment in Discrete Time for ...
An element of Ωt will be denoted by ωt = (ω1 ... Assumption 2.1 For all 0 ≤ t ≤ T − 1, we assume that Qt+1 is a non-empty and convex valued random set such ...

Incorporating Uncertainty in Optimal Investment Decisions
Operations Management with distinction from UMIST, Manchester, UK. He is currently a PhD candidate ... investment in a global economy framework may aid the prosperity of the company, while the wrong investment may ... Risk management has always being

Non-concave optimal investment and no-arbitrage: a ...
Jul 20, 2016 - the existence of an optimal portfolio in a (generically incomplete) discrete-time financial market model with finite time horizon. Key words: no-arbitrage condition ; non-concave utility functions; optimal investment. AMS 2000 subject

Optimal Debt Maturity and Firm Investment - Barcelona GSE Events
recovery rate of 69% for Chapter 11 re-organizations and 27% for Chapter 7 ...... Billett, M. T., T.-H. D. King, and D. C. Mauer (2007): “Growth opportunities.

On Optimal Investment for a Behavioural Investor in ...
Mar 5, 2013 - The issue of well-posedness is a recurrent theme in related papers (see ..... We add a comment on the case α+ = α− assuming, in addition, that ...

Statistical Constraints
2Insight Centre for Data Analytics, University College Cork, Ireland. 3Institute of Population Studies, Hacettepe University, Turkey. 21st European Conference on ...

Optimal contracts with reflection
Jan 27, 2017 - The second component ODE, (6), forces volatility Y to be zero. The only incentive compatible action under Y = 0 is the zero-effort action a = 0. ...... The next auxiliary lemma confirms that a = 0 is only used when the contract is dete

Optimal Allocation Mechanisms with Single ... - Semantic Scholar
Oct 18, 2010 - [25] Milgrom, P. (1996): “Procuring Universal Service: Putting Auction Theory to Work,” Lecture at the Royal Academy of Sciences. [26] Myerson ...

Processing data streams with hard real-time constraints ...
data analysis, VoIP streaming, and sensor data processing .... AES framework is universally applicable to a large family ...... in such a dynamic environment.

Maximum Coverage Problem with Group Budget Constraints - CiteSeerX
maximum coverage problem that we call the maximum coverage problem with ... solution is a subset H ⊆ {S1,S2,...,Sm} such that the total cost of the sets in.

Estimation of Image Bias Field with Sparsity Constraints
James C. Gee [email protected] ..... set the degree of the polynomial model for all testing tech- .... The authors gratefully acknowledge NIH support of this.

Multitask Kernel-based Learning with Logic Constraints
ture space are to be learned by kernel machines and a higher level abstract representation consists of logic clauses on these predicates, known to hold for any ...