Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-tdptf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-08-09T02:23:07.188Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sampling Errors and Portfolio Efficient Analysis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 April 2009

Yoram Kroll  and
Haim Levy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Studies which deal with portfolio efficiency analysis can be divided into two main categories: (a) those concerned with the development of normative decision rules; and (b) those that discuss the application of the normative rules to empirical data. Most of the research on portfolio efficiency analysis uses some set of empirical data, without considering the possible errors which may arise when a sample rather than the entire population is examined. The prevailing neglect of the sampling errors is a clear reflection of the complexity of the issue.

Type
Research Article
Information
Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis , Volume 15 , Issue 3 , September 1980 , pp. 655 - 688
Copyright
Copyright © School of Business Administration, University of Washington 1980

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[Cochran, W. G.Sampling Techniques. New York: Wiley (1965).Google Scholar
[2[David, H. A.Order Statistics. New York: Wiley (1970).Google Scholar
[3[Feller, W.An Introduction to Probability Theory and Its Applications, 2nd ed., Vol. 2. New. York: Wiley (1971).Google Scholar
[4[Fishburn, P. C.Decision and Value Theory. New York: Wiley (1964).Google Scholar
[5[Hadar, J. and Russell, W. R.. “Rules of Ordering Uncertain Prospects.” American Economic Review (03 1969).Google Scholar
[6[Hanoch, G. and Levy, H.. “The Efficiency Analysis of Choices Involving Risk.” Review of Economic Studies (07 1969).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7[Johnson, K. H., and Burgess, R. C.. “The Effect of Sample Sizes on the Accuracy of EV and SSD Efficiency Criteria.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (12 1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8[Levy, H. “Stochastic Dominance among Log-Normal Prospects.” International Economic Review (10 1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[9[Levy, H. “Multi-Period Stochastic Dominance with One-Period Parameters, Liquidity Preference and Equilibrium in the Log-Normal Case.” In Natural Resources, Uncertainty and General Equilibrium Systems. Essays in Memory of Rafael Lusky, ed. by Blinder, A. S. and Friedman, P.. New York: Academic Press (1977).Google Scholar
[10[Levy, H., and Hanoch, G.. “Relative Effectiveness of Efficiency Criteria for Portfolio Selection.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (03 1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11[Levy, H., and Sarnat, M.. “Alternative Efficiency Criteria: An Empirical Analysis.” Journal of Finance (12 1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12[Porter, R. B. “An Empirical Comparison of Stochastic Dominance and Mean-Variance Portfolio Choices Criteria.” Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis (03 1975).Google Scholar
[13[Porter, R. B., and Gaumnitz, J. E.. “Stochastic Dominance vs. Mean-Variance Portfolio Analysis.” American Economic Review (06 1972).Google Scholar
[14[Quirk, J. P., and Saposnik, R.. “Admissibility and Measurable Utility Functions.” Review of Economic Studies (02 1962).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15[Rothschild, M., and Stiglitz, J. E.. “Increasing Risk I: A Definition.” Journal of Economic Theory (09 1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16[Whitmore, G. A. “Third Degree Stochastic Dominance.” American Economic Review (06 1970).Google Scholar