Use of DEA cross-efficiency evaluation in portfolio selection: An application to Korean stock market

We propose a way of using DEA cross-efficiency evaluation in portfolio selection. While cross efficiency is an approach developed for peer evaluation, we improve its use in portfolio selection. In addition to (average) cross-efficiency scores, we suggest to examine the variations of cross-efficiencies, and to incorporate two statistics of cross-efficiencies into the mean-variance formulation of portfolio selection. Two benefits are attained by our proposed approach. One is selection of portfolios well-diversified in terms of their performance on multiple evaluation criteria, and the other is alleviation of the so-called “ganging together” phenomenon of DEA cross-efficiency evaluation in portfolio selection. We apply the proposed approach to stock portfolio selection in the Korean stock market, and demonstrate that the proposed approach can be a promising tool for stock portfolio selection by showing that the selected portfolio yields higher risk-adjusted returns than other benchmark portfolios for a 9-year sample period from 2002 to 2011.

[1]  Muhittin Oral,et al.  A methodology for collective evaluation and selection of industrial R&D projects , 1991 .

[2]  Russell G. Thompson,et al.  The role of multiplier bounds in efficiency analysis with application to Kansas farming , 1990 .

[3]  Rodney H. Green,et al.  Efficiency and Cross-efficiency in DEA: Derivations, Meanings and Uses , 1994 .

[4]  Jie Wu,et al.  Alternative secondary goals in DEA cross-efficiency evaluation , 2008 .

[5]  P. Andersen,et al.  A procedure for ranking efficient units in data envelopment analysis , 1993 .

[6]  Ahti Salo,et al.  Ranking Intervals and Dominance Relations for Ratio-Based Efficiency Analysis , 2011, Manag. Sci..

[7]  W. Cook,et al.  Preference voting and project ranking using DEA and cross-evaluation , 1996 .

[8]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Relationships between Data Envelopment Analysis and Multicriteria Decision Analysis , 1996 .

[9]  Olivier Ledoit,et al.  Robust Performance Hypothesis Testing with the Sharpe Ratio , 2007 .

[10]  Chien-Ming Chen,et al.  Efficient Resource Allocation via Efficiency Bootstraps: An Application to R&D Project Budgeting , 2011, Oper. Res..

[11]  Sungmook Lim,et al.  Minimax and maximin formulations of cross-efficiency in DEA , 2012, Comput. Ind. Eng..

[12]  Holger Scheel,et al.  Undesirable outputs in efficiency valuations , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[13]  C. Tofallis,et al.  Improving Discernment in DEA Using Profiling , 1996 .

[14]  Jesús T. Pastor,et al.  Variables With Negative Values In Dea , 2007 .

[15]  A. Charnes,et al.  Polyhedral Cone-Ratio DEA Models with an illustrative application to large commercial banks , 1990 .

[16]  W. Cooper,et al.  RAM: A Range Adjusted Measure of Inefficiency for Use with Additive Models, and Relations to Other Models and Measures in DEA , 1999 .

[17]  R. Banker,et al.  NONPARAMETRIC ANALYSIS OF TECHNICAL AND ALLOCATIVE EFFICIENCIES IN PRODUCTION , 1988 .

[18]  Samuli Honkapuro,et al.  Enhancement of equity portfolio performance using data envelopment analysis , 2012, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[19]  X. Zhang,et al.  Portfolio selection under DEA-based relative financial strength indicators: case of US industries , 2008, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[20]  N. C. P. Edirisinghe,et al.  Generalized DEA model of fundamental analysis and its application to portfolio optimization , 2007 .

[21]  Hyerim Bae,et al.  Multi-Criteria ABC Inventory Classification Using the Cross-Efficiency Method in DEA , 2011 .

[22]  A. U.S.,et al.  Measuring the efficiency of decision making units , 2003 .

[23]  M. Braglia,et al.  A quality assurance‐oriented methodology for handling trade‐offs in supplier selection , 2000 .