By considering the stock market’s fuzzy uncertainty and investors’ psychological factors, this paper studies the portfolio performance evaluation problems with different risk attitudes (optimistic, pessimistic, and neutral) by the Data Envelopment Analysis (DEA) approach. In this work, the return rates of assets are characterized as trapezoidal fuzzy numbers, whose membership functions with risk attitude parameters are described by exponential expression. Firstly, these characteristics with risk attitude are strictly derived including the possibilistic mean, variance, semi-variance, and semi-absolute deviation based on possibility theory. Secondly, three portfolio models (mean-variance, mean-semi-variance, and mean-semi-absolute-deviation) with different risk attitudes are proposed. Thirdly, we prove the real frontiers determined by our models are concave functions through mathematical theoretical derivation. In addition, two novel indicators are defined by difference and ratio formulas to characterize the correlation between DEA efficiency and portfolio efficiency. Finally, numerical examples are given to verify the feasibility and effectiveness of our model. No matter what risk attitude an investor holds, the DEA can generate approximate real frontiers. Correlation analysis indicates that our proposed approach outperforms in evaluating portfolios with risk attitudes. At the same time, our model is an improvement of Tsaur’s work (2013) which did not study the different risk measures, and an extension of Chen et al.’s work (2018) which only considered risk-neutral attitude.
MarkowitzH.M., Portfolio selection, The Journal of Finance7(1) (1952), 77–91.
2.
MarkowitzH.M. Portfolio selection: Efficient diversification of investments. New York: John Wiley & Sons (1959).
3.
GrootveldH. and HallerbachW., Variance vs downside risk: is therereally that much difference? European Journal of OperationalResearch114 (1999), 304–319.
4.
KonnoH. and YamazakiH., Mean-absolute deviation portfoliooptimization model and its applications to Tokyo stock market, Management Science37(5) (1991), 519–531.
5.
SperanzaM.G., Linear programming models for portfolio optimization, Finance14 (1993), 107–123.
TongX.J., QiL.Q., WuF. and ZhouH., A smoothing method forsolving portfolio optimization with CVaR and applications inallocation of generation asset, Applied Mathematics &Computation216(6) (2010), 1723–1740.
8.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets, Information and Control8(3) (1965), 338–353.
9.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility, Fuzzy Sets and Systems1 (1978), 3–28.
10.
CarlssonC. and FulérR., On possibilistic mean valueand variance of fuzzy numbers, Fuzzy Sets and Systems122 (2001), 315–326.
11.
ZhangW.G. and NieZ.K., On possibilistic variance of fuzzy number, Lecture Notes in Computer Science2639 (2003), 398–402.
12.
ZhangW.G., WangY.L., ChenZ.P. and NieZ.K., Possibilisticmean–variance models and efficient frontiers for portfolioselection problem, Information Sciences177 (2007), 2787–2801.
13.
HuangX., Mean-semivariance models for fuzzy portfolio selection, Journal of Computational and Applied Mathematics217(2008), 1–8.
14.
VercherE., BermúdezJ.D. and SeguraJ.V., Fuzzy portfoliooptimization under downside risk measures, Fuzzy Sets andSystems158(7) (2007), 769–782.
YueW. and WangY.P., A new fuzzy multi-objective higher ordermoment portfolio selection model for diversified portfolios, Physica A465 (2017), 124–140.
17.
DengX. and ChenJ.X., The lower partial moments risk measure in anovel fuzzy framework based on possibility density function, Computers & Industrial Engineering (2022), 108309.
18.
DengX., LiW.M. and LiuY.Y., Hesitant fuzzy portfolio selectionmodel with score and novel hesitant semi-variance, Computers &Industrial Engineering164 (2022), 107879.
19.
KahnemanD. and TverskyA., Prospect theory: An analysis of decisionunder risk, Econometrica47(2) (1979), 263–292.
20.
TsaurR.C., Fuzzy portfolio model with different investor riskattitudes, European Journal of Operational Research227(2) (2013), 385–390.
21.
MomenO., EsfahanipourA. and SeifiA., A robust behavioralportfolio selection: model with investor attitudes and biases, Operational Research: An International Journal2 (2017), 1–20.
22.
ZhouX.Y., WangJ., YangX.P., LevB., TuY. and WangPortfolioS.Y., selection under different attitudes in fuzzy environment, Information Sciences462 (2018), 278–289.
23.
KhayaminA., MirzazadehA. and NaderiB., Portfolio rebalancing withrespect to market psychology in a fuzzy environment: A case study inTehran Stock Exchange, Applied Soft Computing64 (2018), 244–259.
24.
XueL., DiH., ZhaoX.J. and ZhangZ.L., uncertain portfolioselection with mental accounts with realistic constraints, Journal of Computational and Applies Mathematics346 (2019), 42–52.
25.
GongX.M., YuL.Y. and MinC.R., Multi-period portfolio selectionunder the coherent fuzzy environment with dynamic risk-tolerance andexpected-return levels, Applied Soft Computing114(2022) 108104 doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2021.108104.
26.
SharpeW., Mutual fund performance, The Journal of Business39 (1966), 119–138.
27.
TreynorJ., How to rate management investment funds, HarvardBusiness Review44 (1965), 131–136.
28.
JensenM.C., The performance of mutual funds in the period, The Journal of Finance23 (1968), 389–416.
29.
CharnesA., CooperW.W. and RhodesE., Measuring the efficiency ofdecision-making units, European Journal of Operational Research2 (1978), 429–444.
30.
MurthiB.P.S., ChoiY.K. and DesaiP., Efficiency of mutual fundsand portfolio performance measurement: A non-parametric approach, European Journal of Operational Research98(2) (1997), 408–418.
31.
MoreyM.R. and MoreyR.C., Mutual fund performance appraisals: amulti-horizon perspective with endogenous benchmarking, Omega27(2) (1999), 241–58.
32.
JoroT. and NaP., Portfolio performance evaluation inmean-variance-skewness framework, European Journal ofOperational Research175(1) (2016), 446–461.
33.
LiuW.B., ZhouZ.B., LiuD.B. and XiaoH.L., Estimation of portfolioefficiency via DEA, Omega52 (2015), 107–118.
34.
ZhouZ.B., JinQ.Y., XiaoH.L., WuQ. and LiuW.B., Estimation ofcardinality constrained portfolio efficiency via segmented DEA, Omega76 (2018), 28–37.
35.
BrandaM., Diversification-consistent data envelopment analysisbased on directional-distance measures, Omega52 (2015), 65–76.
36.
BanihashemiS. and NavidiS., Portfolio performance evaluation inMean-CVaR framework: A comparison with non-parametric methods valueat risk in Mean-VaR analysis, Operations Research Perspectives4 (2017), 21–28.
37.
ZhouZ., XiaoH., JinQ. and LiuW., DEA frontier improvement andportfolio rebalancing: An application of China mutual funds onconsidering sustainability information disclosure, EuropeanJournal of Operational Research269 (2018), 111–131.
38.
ChenW., GaiY. and GuptaP., Efficiency evaluation of fuzzyportfolio in different risk measures via DEA, Annals ofOperations Research269 (2018), 103–127.
39.
GuptaP., MehlawatM.K., KumarA., YadavA., AggarwalCredibilisticA. Credibilistic fuzzy DEA approach for portfo-lio efficiency evaluation and rebalancing toward benchmark portfolios using positive and negative returns, International Journal of Fuzzy Systems (2020), 10.1007/s40815-020-00801-4.
40.
XiaoH.L., RenT.T. and RenT., Estimation of fuzzy portfolioefficiency via an improved DEA approach, INFOR58(3) (2020), 478–510.
41.
GongX.M., YuC.R., MinL.Y. and GeZ.P., Regret theory-based fuzzymulti-objective portfolio selection model involving DEAcross-efficiency and higher moments, Applied Soft Computing100 (2021) 106958.doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106958.
42.
ChenH.D., WangZ.P., FengZ.F. and LiY.J., A flexible dataenvelopment analysis model for vendor selection and performanceevaluation. ICIC express letters. Part B, Applications: AnInternational Journal of Research and Surveys4(2) (2013), 301–306.
43.
ChenY.C., HuL.H., LuW.C., WuJ.Z. and YangJ.J., Multiplecriteria decision-making for developing an international gameparticipation strategy: a novel application of the data envelopmentanalysis (DEA) two-stage efficiency process, Mathematics9(14) (2021), 1700.
44.
LeN.T., ThinhN.A. and HaN.T.V., Measuring water resource useefficiency of the Dong Nai River Basin (Vietnam): an application ofthe two-stage data envelopment analysis (DEA), Environment,Development and Sustainability24(10) (2022), 12427–12445.
45.
W.C.A. Operational efficiency assessment of thai insurance companies: an application of two-stage data envelopment analysis, International Conference on Power Electronics and Energy Engineering (2015), 252–256.
46.
BankerR.D., CharnesA. and CooperW.W., Some models for estimatingtechnical and scale inefficiencies in data envelopment analysis, Management Science30(9) (1984), 1078–1092.
47.
PearsonK., Notes on the history of correlation, Biometrika13(1) (1920), 25–45.
48.
SpearmanC., The proof and measurement of association between twothings, International Journal of Epidemiology39(5) (2010), 1137–50.
