避險基金資產配置分析應用極值理論

以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：64

、訪客IP：3.147.47.201

姓名

連偉甫(Wei-fu Lien) 查詢紙本館藏

畢業系所

財務金融學系

論文名稱

避險基金資產配置分析應用極值理論
(Hedge Funds Asset Allocation analysis using Extreme Value Theory)

相關論文

★ 市場利率模型對區間型計息債券之定價及分析	★ 標的物相關係數對合成式債務抵押債券及一籃子違約交換訂價的影響
★ 擔保債務憑證市場價格隱含之相關係數結構	★ 保險公司資產配置準則之分析
★ 鞍點近似法於擔保債權憑證之評價與避險	★ 抵押房貸證劵化之評價
★ 外匯市場的遠期與期貨價格差異：逐日結算效果的探討	★ 市場利率模型下利率上限契約的評價與避險
★ 雙層擔保債務憑證評價與敏感性分析	★ 合成式擔保債務憑證內非標準型分劵之定價與避險
★ 應用蒙地卡羅法對HJM 模型下的利率衍生性商品定價	★ 利率上限及交換選擇權之定價－多因子市場利率模型
★ 固定比例投資組合保險策略在合成型擔保債權憑證權益分券之適用性	★ 應用隨機跳躍模型評價死亡率商品
★ 修改Hull-White模型評價固定期間信用違約交換與信用違約交換選擇權	★ 權益違約交換之評價

檔案

[Endnote RIS 格式]

[Bibtex 格式]

[相關文章]

[文章引用]

[完整記錄]

[館藏目錄]

至系統瀏覽論文 ( 永不開放)

摘要(中)

1990年代因為金融市場的快速發展，產生了許多新的金融商品，雖然這些商品讓金融市場的資金更加活絡、更具流動性，但事實上這些新商品往往具有危險性且架構極其複雜，且通常會牽涉到高槓桿的投資工具像是期貨、選擇權及結構型商品，投資人常常因為其高獲利而忽略背後隱含的風險，導致更嚴重的後果，次級房貸風暴重創全球股市就是個血淋淋的例子，因此風險管理就顯得越趨重要。另外以風險值(Value-at-Risk)作為風險衡量的方式也越來越普遍，其中很重要的原因就是風險值(Value-at-Risk)不只可以應用於常態分配(Normal distribution)，也能夠應用於更能描述資產報酬的其他分配，在近年許多銀行與金融機構已經開始採用風險值(Value-at-Risk)作為風險的衡量。本研究採用Campbell, R., Huisman, R., Koedijk, K. (2001)所發展的資產配置分析架構(mean-VaR framework)進行實證研究，該分析架構的概念是在目標最大損失的限制下，極大化投資組合預期報酬，同樣也有一類似夏普指數(Sharpe ratio)的績效衡量指標。在風險的部份，我們考慮ㄧ新的風險值估計方式，也就是極值理論(Extreme Value Theory)，極值理論可以針對分配的肥尾直接配適，在使用上相較於其他風險值的估計方式有其方便性。研究樣本包含三種資產的報酬率，分別為股票及債券及避險基金，我們以S&P 500以及10年期美國政府公債來代表此兩樣傳統資產，避險基金也是近年興起的新投資工具，資料來源為Datastream及Hedge Fund Research(HFR)資料庫。研究議題可分為兩部份，第一部分在探討使用不同的風險值衡量方式會如何影響資產配置效率，第二部份主是要探討以傳統資產為原投資組合下，加入避險基金或是避險基金中不同策略的指數報酬後，能否改善資產配置效率。實證結果發現，比較常態風險值(Normal-VaR)與極值理論風險值(Extreme-VaR)後，假設資產報酬服從常態分配會導致投資策略過度積極，亦即投資於風險性資產比重偏多。在避險基金的部份，結果顯示部分的避險基金策略無法改善資產配置效率，這個結果和其他避險基金的研究文獻較為不同。

摘要(英)

In 1990s financial market grew fast and completely, and creates lots of new financial products. In fact they are complicated and dangerous, since such kind of products always involve high leveraged investment tool such as options、futures and structural products. Here is a bloody example; sub-prime crashes the financial market and there is no exception in the world. Therefore risk management became more and more important today. Besides VaR; the new measure of risk, became more popular, since it could be applied to not only normal distribution but also to other distributions which are appropriate to describe the returns of new financial products. In recent year Banks and financial institutions have adopted VaR as the measure of risk. In this paper, we adopt a mean-VaR framework developed by Campbell, Huisman and Koedijk (2001) which allocates financial assets by maximizing expected return subject to the loss constraint. Similar to the mean-variance framework, they constructed a performance index like the Sharpe ratio. Here we introduce a new method for VaR estimation, Extreme Value Theory, which incorporates the heavy tail of distribution and is convenient comparing with other methods. We use three assets in our empirical analysis; two of them are bond and stock, which are viewed as traditional assets. Another one is hedge funds which is one of new asset in financial market and is consisting of different strategies. We can divide our analysis into two parts. One is to examine how allocation efficiency changes when using different methods of VaR. The other topic is to examine whether the hedge funds improve the allocation efficiency of traditional portfolio or not. We find that when using Normal-VaR it results in too aggressive investment strategy comparing with Extreme Value Theory based VaR. And we also find that the hedge funds may not perform as well as we thought. Some strategies improve the allocation efficiency of traditional portfolio, but some do not. It is different from other researches about hedge funds.

關鍵字(中)

★ 避險基金
★ 風險值
★ 極值理論
★ 資產配置

關鍵字(英)

★ asset allocation
★ Extreme Value Theory
★ VaR
★ hedge funds

論文目次

Contents
Section 1. Introduction 1
Section 2. Literature Reviews 2
Section 3. Portfolio selection model 4
Section 3.1 Portfolio selection problem and downside risk constraint 4
Section 3.2 Optimal portfolio construction 6
Section 4. Overview of major hedge fund strategies 7
Section 5. Overview of Value-at-Risk models 10
Section 5.1 Normal VaR 10
Section 5.2 Modified VaR 11
Section 5.3 Extreme Value Theory based VaR 12
Section 6. Data Description 14
Section 7. Optimal portfolio selection under loss constraints 16
Section 8. Do hedge funds improve allocation efficiency? 21
Section 9. Conclusion 22
Reference 24
List of Figures
Figure 1 QQ-Plot of index 16
Figure 2 Efficient VaR Frontier at 95% confidence level 19
Figure 3 Efficient VaR Frontier at 99% confidence level 20
Figure 4 Efficient VaR Frontier of Hedge Funds strategies 21
List of Tables
Table 1 Summary Statistics 15
Table 2 Optimal portfolios under Normal distribution 17
Table 3 Optimal Portfolios to meet loss constraint under Normal distribution 18
Table 4 Optimal Portfolios to meet loss constraint under fat-tailed distribution 19

參考文獻

Agarwal, V. and N. Naik., (2000), “On Taking the “Alternative” Route: Risks, Rewards, Style and Performance Persistence of Hedge Funds.” Journal of Alternative Investments, 6-23.
Arzac, E., Bawa, V., (1977). Portfolio choice and equilibrium in capital markets with safety first investors. Journal of Financial Economics 4, 277–288.
Balkema, A. and de Haan, L. (1974), Residual life time at great age. Annals of Probability 2,792-804.
Boothe, P.M., Glassman, D.A., (1987). The statistical distribution of exchange rates: empirical evidence and economic implications. Journal of International Economics 22, 297–319.
Campbell, R.A., Huisman, R., Koedijk, C.G., (2001). Optimal portfolio selection in a
Value-at-Risk framework. Journal of Banking and Finance 25, 1789-1804.
Duffie, D. and J. Pan, (1997), An Overview of Value-at-Risk. Journal of Derivatives, 4, 7–49.
Edwards, F. R. and J. Liew., (1999), “Hedge Funds versus Managed Futures as Asset Classes.” The Journal of Derivatives, 45-61.
Fama, E.F. and R. Roll (1968),”Some Properties of Symmetric Stable Distributions,” Journal of Business, 63, 817-836
Fisher, R. and Tippett, L. (1928), Limiting forms of the frequency distribution of the largest or smallest member of a sample. Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 24, 180-190.
Harvey, C., and A., Siddique, (2000), Conditional Skewness in Asset Pricing Tests, Journal of Finance 55, 1263-1295.
Jansen, D. W., and C. G. De Vries, (1991), On the frequency of large stock returns: Putting booms and busts into perspectives, Review of Economics and Statistics 73, 18–24.
Jorion, Ph., (1996), Value at Risk : A New Benchmark for Measuring Derivatives Risk. Irwin Professional Pub.
Kast, R., Luciano, E., and L. Peccati, (1998), VaR and Optimization: 2nd International Workshop on Preferences and Decisions. Trento, July 1–3 1998
Lamm, R., (1999), “Portfolios of Alternative Assets: Why not 100% Hedge Funds?” The Journal of Investing, 87-97.
Liang, Bing, (1999), On the performance of hedge funds, Financial Analysts Journal 55, 72-85.
Litterman, R., (1997a), Hot Spots and Hedges (I). Risk, 10(3), 42–45.
Litterman, R., (1997b), Hot Spots and Hedges (II). Risk, 10(5), 38–42.
Lucas, A., and P. Klaassen, (1998), Extreme Returns, Downside Risk, and Optimal Asset Allocation. Journal of Portfolio Management, 25(1), 71–79.
Lyzanets, Natalya, and Maksym Senchyan, (2005), Comparing different Value-at-Risk Models for Hedge Funds, Unpublished Work.
Mausser, H. and D. Rosen (1991) Beyond VaR: From Measuring Risk to Managing Risk. ALGO Research Quarterly, 1(2), 5–20.
Modigliani, L., (1999), Quantitative Aspects of Analyzing Risk – Are Hedge Funds Worth It? In: Lake, R. A., ed., Evaluating and Implementing Hedge Fund Strategies, 2nd edition, London: Euromoney Publications.
Pickands, J. (1975), Statistical inference using extreme order statistics. The Annals of Statistics 3,119-131.
Pritsker, M., (1997), Evaluating Value at Risk Methodologies. Journal of Financial Services Research, 12(2/3), 201–242.
RiskMetricsTM, (1996), Technical Document, 4–th Edition, New York, NY, J. P. Morgan Inc., December.
Roy, A.D., (1952). Safety-first and the holding of assets. Econometrica 20,431-449.
Schneeweis, T. and G. Martin., (2000), The Benefits of Hedge Funds: Asset Allocation for the Institutional Investor. Lehman Brothers.
Simons, K., (1996), Value-at-Risk New Approaches to Risk Management. New England Economic Review, Sept/Oct, 3–13.
Stublo Beder, T., (1995), VAR: Seductive but Dangerous. Financial Analysts Journal, Sep.-Oct., 12–24.
Stambaugh, F., (1996), Risk and Value-at-Risk. European Management Journal, 14(6), 612–621.
Tremont Partners Inc. and TASS Investment Research., (1999), “The Case for Hedge Funds.” The Journal of Alternative Investments, 71-72.

指導教授

岳夢蘭(Meng-lan Yueh)

審核日期

2008-7-11

推文