马克维茨投资组合选择

1、.：.；Portfolio SelectionHarry MarkowitzThe Journal of Finance, Vol. 7, No. 1. (Mar., 1952), pp. 77-91.Stable URL:/sici?sici=0022-1082%28195203%297%3A1%3C77%3APS%3E2.0.CO%3B2-1The Journal of Finance is currently published by American Finance Association.Your use of the JSTOR archive ind

2、icates your acceptance of JSTORs Terms and Conditions of Use, available /about/terms.html. JSTORs Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless you have obtainedprior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you may use

3、 content inthe JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained /journals/afina.html.Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright not

4、ice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.The JSTOR Archive is a trusted digital repository providing for long-term preservation and access to leading academicjournals and scholarly literature from around the world. The Archive is supported by libraries, scholarly societies,

5、 publishers,and foundations. It is an initiative of JSTOR, a not-for-profit organization with a mission to help the scholarly community takeadvantage of advances in technology. For more information regarding JSTOR, please contact Sun Oct 21 07:53:25 2007PORTFOLIO SELECTION*

6、HARRYMARKOWITZThe Rand CorporationTHEPROCESS OF SELECTING a portfolio may be divided into two stages.The first stage starts with observation and experience and ends withbeliefs about the future performances of available securities. Thesecond stage starts with the relevant beliefs about future perfor

7、mancesand ends with the choice of portfolio. This paper is concerned with thesecond stage. We first consider the rule that the investor does (or should)maximize discounted expected, or anticipated, returns. This rule is rejectedboth as a hypothesis to explain, and as a maximum to guide investmentbeh

8、avior. We next consider the rule that the investor does (orshould) consider expected return a desirable thing and variance of returnan undesirable thing. This rule has many sound points, both as amaxim for, and hypothesis about, investment behavior. We illustrategeometrically relations between belie

9、fs and choice of portfolio accordingto the expected returns-variance of returns rule.One type of rule concerning choice of portfolio is that the investordoes (or should) maximize the discounted (or capitalized) value offuture returns.l Since the future is not known with certainty, it mustbe expected

10、 or anticipatded7 returns which we discount. Variationsof this type of rule can be suggested. Following Hicks, we could letanticipated returns include an allowance for risk.2 Or, we could letthe rate at which we capitalize the returns from particular securitiesvary with risk.The hypothesis (or maxim

11、) that the investor does (or should)maximize discounted return must be rejected. If we ignore market imperfectionsthe foregoing rule never implies that there is a diversifiedportfolio which is preferable to all non-diversified portfolios. Diversificationis both observed and sensible; a rule of behav

12、ior which doesnot imply the superiority of diversification must be rejected both as ahypothesis and as a maxim.* This paper is based on work done by the author while at the Cowles Commission forResearch in Economics and with the financial assistance of the Social Science ResearchCouncil. I t will be

13、 reprinted as Cowles Commission Paper, New Series, No. 60.1. See, for example, J.B. Williams, The Theory of Investment Value (Cambridge, Mass.:Harvard University Press, 1938), pp. 55-75.2. J. R. Hicks, V a l eand Capital (New York: Oxford University Press, 1939), p. 126.Hicks applies the rule to a f

14、irm rather than a portfolio.78 The Journal of FinanceThe foregoing rule fails to imply diversification no matter how theanticipated returns are formed; whether the same or different discountrates are used for different securities; no matter how these discountrates are decided upon or how they vary o

15、ver time.3 The hypothesisimplies that the investor places all his funds in the security with thegreatest discounted value. If two or more securities have the same value,then any of these or any combination of these is as good as anyother.We can see this analytically: suppose there are N securities;

16、let ritbethe anticipated return (however decided upon) at time t per dollar investedin security i; let djt be the rate at which the return on the ilksecurity at time t is discounted back to the present; let Xi be the relativeamount invested in security i .We exclude short sales, thus Xi 2 0for all i

17、 . Then the discounted anticipated return of the portfolio isRi = xmdi, T i t is the discounted return of the ithsecurity, thereforet-1R = ZXiRi where Ri is independent of Xi. Since Xi 2 0 for all iand ZXi = 1, R is a weighted average of Ri with the Xi as non-negativeweights. To maximize R, we let X

18、i = 1 for i with maximum Ri.If several Ra, a = 1, . . ,K are maximum then any allocation withmaximizes R. In no case is a diversified portfolio preferred to all nondiversifiedpoitfolios.It will be convenient at this point to consider a static model. Insteadof speaking of the time series of returns f

19、rom the ithsecurity(ril, ri2) . . . ,rit, . . .) we will speak of the flow of returns (ri) fromthe ithsecurity. The flow of returns from the portfolio as a whole is3. The results depend on the assumption that the anticipated returns and discountrates are independent of the particular investors portf

20、olio.4. If short sales were allowed, an infinite amount of money would be placed in thesecurity with highest r.Portfolio Selection 79R = ZX,r,. As in the dynamic case if the investor wished to maximizeanticipated return from the portfolio he would place all his funds inthat security with maximum ant

21、icipated returns.There is a rule which implies both that the investor should diversifyand that he should maximize expected return. The rule states that theinvestor does (or should) diversify his funds among all those securitieswhich give maximum expected return. The law of large numbers willinsure t

22、hat the actual yield of the portfolio will be almost the same asthe expected yield.5 This rule is a special case of the expected returnsvarianceof returns rule (to be presented below). It assumes that thereis a portfolio which gives both maximum expected return and minimumvariance, and it commends t

23、his portfolio to the investor.This presumption, that the law of large numbers applies to a portfolioof securities, cannot be accepted. The returns from securities aretoo intercorrelated. Diversification cannot eliminate all variance.The portfolio with maximum expected return is not necessarily theon

24、e with minimum variance. There is a rate at which the investor cangain expected return by taking on variance, or reduce variance by givingup expected return.We saw that the expected returns or anticipated returns rule is inadequate.Let us now consider the expected returns-variance of returns(E-V) ru

25、le. It will be necessary to first present a few elementaryconcepts and results of mathematical statistics. We will then showsome implications of the E-V rule. After this we will discuss its plausibility.In our presentation we try to avoid complicated mathematical statementsand proofs. As a consequen

26、ce a price is paid in terms of rigor andgenerality. The chief limitations from this source are (1) we do notderive our results analytically for the n-security case; instead, wepresent them geometrically for the 3 and 4 security cases; (2) we assumestatic probability beliefs. In a general presentatio

27、n we must recognizethat the probability distribution of yields of the various securities is afunction of time. The writer intends to present, in the future, the general,mathematical treatment which removes these limitations.We will need the following elementary concepts and results ofmathematical st

28、atistics:Let Y be a random variable, i.e., a variable whose value is decided bychance. Suppose, for simplicity of exposition, that Y can take on afinite number of values yl, yz, . . . ,y,L. et the probability that Y =5. Uilliams, op. cit., pp. 68, 69.80 The Journal of Financeyl, be pl; that Y = y2 b

29、e pz etc. The expected value (or mean) of Y isdefined to beThe variance of Y is defined to beV is the average squared deviation of Y from its expected value. V is acommonly used measure of dispersion. Other measures of dispersion,closely related to V are the standard deviation, u = ./V and the coeff

30、icientof variation, a/E.Suppose we have a number of random variables: R1, . . . ,R,. If R isa weighted sum (linear combination) of the Rithen R is also a random variable. (For example R1, may be the numberwhich turns up on one die; R2, that of another die, and R the sum ofthese numbers. In this case

31、 n = 2, a1 = a2 = 1).It will be important for us to know how the expected value andvariance of the weighted sum (R) are related to the probability distributionof the R1, . . . ,R,. We state these relations below; we referthe reader to any standard text for proof.6The expected value of a weighted sum

32、 is the weighted sum of theexpected values. I.e., E(R) = alE(R1) +aZE(R2) + . . . + a,E(R,)The variance of a weighted sum is not as simple. To express it we mustdefine covariance. The covariance of R1 and Rz isi.e., the expected value of (the deviation of R1 from its mean) times(the deviation of R2

33、from its mean). In general we define the covariancebetween Ri and R as i=jE ( Ri -E (Ri) I Ri-E (Rj)I fuij may be expressed in terms of the familiar correlation coefficient(pij). The covariance between Ri and Rj is equal to (their correlation)times (the standard deviation of Ri) times (the standard

34、deviation ofRj)l:U i j = P i j U i U j6. E.g.,J. V. Uspensky, Introduction to mathematical Probability (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1937), chapter 9, pp. 161-81.Portfolio SelectionThe variance of a weighted sum isIf we use the fact that the variance of Ri is uii thenLet Ri be the return on the iNsecurity

35、. Let pi be the expected vaIueof Ri; uij, be the covariance between Ri and Rj (thus uii is the varianceof Ri). Let Xi be the percentage of the investors assets which are allocatedto the ithsecurity. The yield (R) on the portfolio as a whole isThe Ri (and consequently R) are considered to be random v

36、ariables.The Xi are not random variables, but are fixed by the investor. Sincethe Xi are percentages we have ZXi = 1. In our analysis we will excludenegative values of the Xi (i.e., short sales); therefore Xi 0 forall i.The return (R) on the portfolio as a whole is a weighted sum of randomvariables

37、(where the investor can choose the weights). From ourdiscussion of such weighted sums we see that the expected return Efrom the portfolio as a whole isand the variance is7. I.e., we assume that the investor does (and should) act as if he had probability beliefsconcerning these variables. I n general

38、 we voulde xpect that the investor could tell us, forany two events (A and B), whether he personally considered A more likely than B, B morelikely than A, or both equally likely. If the investor were consistent in his opinions on suchmatters, he would possess a system of probability beliefs. We cann

39、ot expect the investorto be consistent in every detail. We can, however, expect his probability beliefs to beroughly consistent on important matters that have been carefully considered. We shouldalso expect that he will base his actions upon these probability beliefs-even though theybe in part subje

40、ctive.This paper does not consider the difficult question of how investors do (or should) formtheir probability beliefs.82 The Journal of FinanceFor fixed probability beliefs (pi, oij) the investor has a choice of variouscombinations of E and V depending on his choice of portfolioXI, . . . ,XN.Suppo

41、se that the set of all obtainable (E, V) combinationswere as in Figure 1.The E-V rule states that the investor would(or should) want to select one of those portfolios which give rise to the(E, V) combinations indicated as efficient in the figure; i.e., those withminimum V for given E or more and max

42、imum E for given V or less.There are techniques by which we can compute the set of efficientportfolios and efficient (E, V) combinations associated with given piattainableE, V combinationsand oij. We will not present these techniques here. We will, however,illustrate geometrically the nature of the

43、efficient surfaces for casesin which N (the number of available securities) is small.The calculation of efficient surfaces might possibly be of practicaluse. Perhaps there are ways, by combining statistical techniques andthe judgment of experts, to form reasonable probability beliefs (pi,aij).We cou

44、ld use these beliefs to compute the attainable efficientcombinations of (E, V). The investor, being informed of what (E, V)combinations were attainable, could state which he desired. We couldthen find the portfolio which gave this desired combination.Portfolio Selection 83Two conditions-at least-mus

45、t be satisfied before it would be practicalto use efficient surfaces in the manner described above. First, theinvestor must desire to act according to the E-V maxim. Second, wemust be able to arrive at reasonable pi and uij. We will return to thesematters later.Let us consider the case of three secu

46、rities. In the three security caseour model reduces to4) XiO for i = l , 2 , 3 .From (3) we get3) Xs= 1-XI-XzIfwe substitute (3) in equation (1)and (2) we get E and V as functionsof X1 and Xz. For example we find1) E =3 +x1(111 - 3 +) x2 (112 -113)The exact formulas are not too important here (that

47、of V is given below).8 We can simply writea) E =E (XI, Xdb) V = V (Xi, Xz)By using relations (a), (b), (c), we can work with two dimensionalgeometry.The attainable set of portfolios consists of all portfolios whichsatisfy constraints (c) and (3) (or equivalently (3) and (4). The attainablecombinatio

48、ns of XI, X2 are represented by the triangle abc inFigure 2. Any point to the left of the Xz axis is not attainable becauseit violates the condition that X1 3 0. Any point below the X1 axis isnot attainable because it violates the condition that Xz 3 0. Any84 The Journal of Financepoint above the li

49、ne (1 - X1 - Xz = 0) is not attainable because itviolates the condition that X3 = 1 - XI - Xz 0.We define an isomean curve to be the set of all points (portfolios)with a given expected return. Similarly an isovariance line is defined tobe the set of all points (portfolios) with a given variance of r

50、eturn.An examination of the formulae for E and V tells us the shapes of theisomean and isovariance curves. Specifically they tell us that typicallygthe isomean curves are a system of parallel straight lines; the isovariancecurves are a system of concentric ellipses (see Fig. 2). For example,if 2 p3

51、equation 1 can be written in the familiar form X2 = a +bX1; specifically (1)Thus the slope of the isomean line associated with E = Eois -(pl -j3)/(.2- p3) its intercept is (Eo - p3)/(p2 - p3). If we change E wechange the intercept but not the slope of the isomean line. This confirmsthe contention th

52、at the isomean lines form a system of parallellines.Similarly, by a somewhat less simple application of analytic geometry,we can confirm the contention that the isovariance lines form afamily of concentric ellipses. The center of the system is the pointwhich minimizes V. We will label this point X.

53、Its expected return andvariance we will label E and V. Variance increases as you move awayfrom X. More precisely, if one isovariance curve, C1, lies closer to Xthan another, Cz, then C1 is associated with a smaller variance than Cz.With the aid of the foregoing geometric apparatus let us seek theeff

54、icient sets.X, the center of the system of isovariance ellipses, may fall eitherinside or outside the attainable set. Figure 4 illustrates a case in whichXfalls inside the attainable set. In this case: Xis efficient. For no otherportfolio has a V as low as X; therefore no portfolio can have eithersm

55、aller V (with the same or greater E) or greater E with the same orsmaller V. No point (portfolio) with expected return E less than Eis efficient. For we have E E and V 0, aU/dE 0) he will never accept an actuarially fair14 bet. But if13. If R is a random variable that takes on a finite number of val

56、ues 71,. . . ,m withprobabilities *I, . . . , gnrespectively, and expected value E, then = 2*i(ri - El3i=l14. One in which the amount gained by winning the bet times the robabilitvof winningPort)olio Selection 9IU = U(E, V, Mg) and if dU/dM3 # 0 then there are some fair betswhich would be accepted.P

57、erhaps-for a great variety of investing institutions which consideryield to be a good thing; risk, a bad thing; gambling, to beavoided-E, V efficiency is reasonable as a working hypothesis and aworking maxim.Two uses of the E-V principle suggest themselves. We might use itin theoretical analyses or we might use it in the actual selection ofportfolios.In theoretical analyses we might inquire, for example, abo