Sustainable Portfolio Optimization with Higher-Order Moments of Risk
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sustainable economic growth and development of stock market plays an important role in diversifying the investment opportunities that can be assessed accordingly. However, a true diversification in portfolio is impossible without inclusion of higher-order moments, skewness and kurtosis. However, the risk-taking behavior of investors is modelled with the help of higher-order moments of risk. Therefore, this study is intended to construct optimal portfolios and efficient frontiers with the inclusion of higher-order moments of risk. The findings show that optimized portfolios with inclusion of skewness and kurtosis are sustainable and significantly different than those from mean-variance optimized portfolios which show asymmetric and fat-tail risk. Results further confirm its significance in balancing the additional risk dimensions and returns in Asian emerging stock markets for sustainable returns. The results also endorse that induction of skewness and kurtosis affects portfolio allocation weights and expected returns. Therefore, this study strongly recommends the inclusion of higher moments of risk for optimization to curtail their effect and sub-optimal decisions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".