3
$\begingroup$

Ok, I am working on a problem that consists of the following:

I am looking to solve the portfolio choice optimization problem (maximizing utility with a known utility function) in the case where all of the underlying random variables are multivariate normal.


Problem:

define $\phi$ as the amount invested in each of $n$ risky assets, such that the budget constraint is:

$\Sigma_{i=1}^{n}\phi_i=w_0$ for some initial wealth, $w_0$

Show that the optimal portfolio is:

$\phi=\frac{1}{\alpha}\Sigma^{-1}\mu+[\frac{\alpha w_0-1'\Sigma^{-1}\mu}{\alpha 1'\Sigma^{-1}1}]\Sigma^{-1}1$

where each of the 1's is an $n$-dimensional column vector of 1's.


Work/Attempt

Ok, these are the things I know:

I am dealing with CARA utility, which gives me a utility function of the form:

$u(w)=-e^{-\alpha w}$ where $w$ is my random end-of-period wealth which I believe to be distributed as

$w$~$N(\mu,\sigma^2)$ with $\mu=\phi'\mu$ (a vector of expected returns scaled by the amount invested in each), and $\sigma^2=\phi'\Sigma\phi$ where $\Sigma$ is the covariance matrix of the $n$ risky assets.

So, to find the expected utility of this function, I use the fact that the expectation of an exponential of normals is the exponential of the mean plus half the variance, to arrive at:

$E(u(w))=-e^{-\alpha\phi'\mu+\frac{\alpha^2\phi'\Sigma\phi}{2}}$

Factoring out a negative alpha, and equating the remaining part of the exponential as the certainty equivalent of a random wealth (I might not be explaining that well, but I am almost certain this is the correct path), I can maximize utility by maximizing the utility of the certainty equivalent, which is done by maximizing the certainty equivalent itself.

All that to say, I need:

$\frac{\partial}{\partial\phi}\phi'\mu+\frac{\alpha\phi'\Sigma\phi}{2}=0$

From there I can't seem to get anything even remotely close to the result I am supposed to show. I have

$1'\mu+\alpha\Sigma\phi=0$

which seems to mirror the first term in the result, but I am lost as to where the rest comes from.

Any help would be appreciated. I'm not sure if my mistake is in the multi-dimensional partial derivative, or if it is in obtaining the function that needs to be maximized. The book I am using has a similar problem for a single risky asset which I can work through just fine, but the exclusion of a risk-free asset (which would seem to simplify the wealth constraint) makes it more confusing to me.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Where is the $\theta$ in $\frac{\partial}{\partial\theta}\phi'\mu+\frac{\alpha\phi'\Sigma\phi}{2}=0$ coming from? $\endgroup$ – BKay Feb 5 '15 at 1:26
  • $\begingroup$ @BKay My mistake, I believe that should be a ϕ $\endgroup$ – user2034 Feb 5 '15 at 2:03
  • $\begingroup$ You should edit the question to fix the typo. Chris Carroll has some nice notes on the single risky asset version of this problem. econ2.jhu.edu/people/ccarroll/public/lecturenotes/AssetPricing/… $\endgroup$ – BKay Feb 5 '15 at 2:18
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You are not considering the constraint $\sum \phi_i=w_0$ (you need to form a Lagrangian, or substitute out one of phis). $\endgroup$ – ivansml Feb 5 '15 at 2:19
  • $\begingroup$ @ivansml could you give a more detailed explanation? I'm not sure I'm following. $\endgroup$ – user2034 Feb 5 '15 at 3:02
1
$\begingroup$

The problem is equivalent to maximizing

$$ \max_\phi \left( \phi ' \mu - \frac{1}{2} \alpha \phi ' \Sigma \phi \right) $$

subject to

$$ \mathbf{1}' \phi = w_0. $$

(boldface 1 is column vector of ones, ' stands for transposition).

The lagrangian is

$$ L(\phi, \lambda) = \phi ' \mu - \frac{1}{2} \alpha \phi ' \Sigma \phi - \lambda \left( \mathbf{1}' \phi - w_0 \right), $$

and its jacobian wrt. $\phi$ is

$$ \mathrm{D}_\phi L(\phi, \lambda) = \mu' - \alpha \phi ' \Sigma - \lambda \mathbf{1}'. $$

First order conditions require that the jacobian is equal to zero (in each element), plus the original budget constraint, which together (after transposing the jacobian) yields a system of linear equations in $(\phi,\lambda)$:

$$ \begin{split} \Sigma \phi + \mathbf{1} \lambda &= \frac{1}{\alpha}\mu \\ \mathbf{1}' \phi &= w_0 \end{split} $$

We can solve for $\phi$ as a function of multiplier $\lambda$:

$$ \phi = \frac{1}{\alpha} \Sigma^{-1} \mu - \lambda \Sigma^{-1} \mathbf{1} $$

Plugging this into the budget constraint and some algebra yields an expression for $\lambda$:

$$ \lambda = \frac{\frac{1}{\alpha}\mathbf{1}' \Sigma^{-1} \mu - w_0}{\mathbf{1}' \Sigma^{-1} \mathbf{1}}, $$

and substituting this into the expression for $\phi$ should yield the result as given in the question.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.