CASE STUDY: Hedging Portfolio of Options with Expectile (XVaR)
Back to main page
Case study background and problem formulations
Instructions for optimization with PSG Run-File, PSG MATLAB Toolbox, PSG MATLAB Subroutines and PSG R.
PROBLEM 1: problem_cs_hedging_portfolio_of_options_with_XVaRMinimize XVaR(x) (minimizing hedging error)
subject to
P(x) ≤ Const (constraint on initial portfolio value)
Box constraints (non-negativity constraints on positions)
——————————————————————–
XVaR = Expectile of residual
P(x) = initial price of the hedging portfolio (linear function)
Box constraints = constraints on individual decision variables
——————————————————————–
parameter values: q in range (0.5, 1.0)
# of Variables | # of Scenarios | Objective Value | Solving Time, PC 2.50GHz (sec) | ||||
Dataset 1 | 121 | 45,000 | 192,…, 920 | 30.0 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Environments | |||||||
Run-File | Problem Statement | Data | Solution | ||||
Matlab | Problem Statement | Data | Solution | ||||
Python | Problem Statement | Data |
Minimize XVaR(x) (minimizing expectile risk)
subject to
avg_g(x) ≥ 0 (nonnegative portfolio return constraint)
linear(x) = 1 (portfolio budget constraint)
Box constraints (non-negativity constraints on positions)
Calculate pr_pen(x) (calculate confidence level alpha corresponding to q)
Calculate CVaR(x) (calculate CVaR at expectile optimal point)
Minimize CVaR(x) (minimizing CVaR risk)
subject to
avg_g(x) ≥ 0 (nonnegative portfolio return constraint)
linear(x) = 1 (portfolio budget constraint)
Box constraints (non-negativity constraints on positions)
Value:
XVaR(x) (Calculate expectile at optimal CVaR point)
——————————————————————–
XVaR(x) = Expectile of linear loss
CVaR(x) = CVaR of linear loss
pr_pen(x) = probability of exceedance
avg_g(x) = Expected value of linear loss (linear function)
linear(x) = Sum of portfolio weights (linear function)
Box constraints = constraints on individual decision variables
——————————————————————–
parameter values: q in range (0.55, 1.0)
# of Variables | # of Scenarios | Objective Value | Solving Time, PC 2.70GHz (sec) | ||||
Dataset 1 | 4 | 10,000 | 0,…,0.1 | 5.0 | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Environments | |||||||
Run-File | Problem Statement | Data | Solution | ||||
Python | Problem Statement | Data |
CASE STUDY SUMMARY
1. This case study hedges a Portfolio of Options by a Portfolio of Stocks and Options. The goal is to create a hedging portfolio with a cost that does not exceed a specified upper limit at the start time (t=0). The effectiveness of the hedge at the end time period (t=T) is measured by Expectile. We optimized hedging portfolio weights with several parameter value q of the Expectile.
2. This case study demonstrates the equivalence of expectile and CVaR portfolio optimization in the sense that for each expectile parameter q there exists a confidence level alpha such that both expectile and CVaR portfolios have the same optimal weights.
PSG code optimizes problems with different parameter q using a cycle operation.
1. This case study hedges a Portfolio of Options by a Portfolio of Stocks and Options. The goal is to create a hedging portfolio with a cost that does not exceed a specified upper limit at the start time (t=0). The effectiveness of the hedge at the end time period (t=T) is measured by Expectile. We optimized hedging portfolio weights with several parameter value q of the Expectile.
2. This case study demonstrates the equivalence of expectile and CVaR portfolio optimization in the sense that for each expectile parameter q there exists a confidence level alpha such that both expectile and CVaR portfolios have the same optimal weights.
PSG code optimizes problems with different parameter q using a cycle operation.
References
Rockafellar, R.T., and S. Uryasev (2000): Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. Journal of Risk. 2 (3). 21–41. https://doi.org/10.21314/JOR.2000.038
Rockafellar, R.T., and S. Uryasev (2000): Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. Journal of Risk. 2 (3). 21–41. https://doi.org/10.21314/JOR.2000.038