Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-k7p5g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-10T15:26:56.912Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Effects of Sampling Fluctuations on the Required Inputs of Security Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 October 2009

Richard C. Burgess  and
Keith H. Johnson
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This project was intended to test the usefulness of the Markowitz-based allocation model of which sampling fluctuations are clearly a possible weakness. Realistic conditions were formulated and a data set was simulated to insure a stable, independent, and normally distributed data set. The methodology was constructed such that the only difference in the portfolio performance results was the number of historical observations to estimate the inputs.

It was found that a minimum of 30 historical observations was required to yield efficient portfolio performance characteristics. It may be argued that this represents a large number of observations, although it is clearly not as large as those of other statistical procedures such as factor analysis or discriminant analysis.

This article addressed only the issue of the number of observations and not the appropriate length, i.e., monthly or quarterly. Dickinson demonstrated that the ratio of variances of two securities influenced the accuracy of the estimates of wi, the proportion of total capital invested in each of the two assets. Changing the length of the observation will change these variance ratios for many assets. A study is currently in progress to trace this effect on subsequent portfolio performance. It is hoped that these results, and those yet to come, will ease the burden of many of the arbitrary assumptions that we are presently forced to make in empirical investigations of efficient portfolio performance.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 11 , Issue 5 , December 1976 , pp. 847 - 854
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Dickinson, J. P. “The Reliability of Estimation Procedures in Portfolio Analysis.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (June 1974).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Hadar, J., and Russell, W. R.. “Rules for Ordering Uncertain Prospects.” American Economic Review (March 1969).Google Scholar
[3]Johnson, Keith H., and Burgess, Richard C.. “The Effects of Sample Sizes on the Accuracy of E-V and SSD Efficiency Criteria.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (December 1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Lintner, John. “The Valuation of Risk Assets and the Selection of Risky Investments in Stock Portfolios and Capital Budgets.” Review of Economics and Statistics (February 1965).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[5]Markowitz, Harry M. “Portfolio Selection.” Journal of Finance (March 1952).Google Scholar
[6]Mossin, Jan. “Equilibrium in a Capital Asset Market.” Econometrica (October 1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Porter, R. Burr. “An Empirical Comparison of Stochastic Dominance and Mean-Variance Portfolio Choice Criteria.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (September 1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Porter, R. Burr; Wart, James R.; and Ferguson, Donald L.. “Efficient Algorithms for C nducting Stochastic Dominance Tests on Large Numbers of Portfolios.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (January 1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9]Sharpe, William F. “A Simplified Model for Portfolio Analysis.” Management Science (January 1963).CrossRefGoogle Scholar