Portfolio Optimization Using a Novel Data-Driven EWMA Covariance Model with Big Data
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recently there has been a growing interest in using machine learning methods with empirical variance covariance matrix of returns to study Markovitz portfolio optimization. The statistical technique of graphical LASSO (GL) for stock selection in the portfolio assumes that the asset returns are normally distributed, independent random variables with constant variance. In this paper sign correlations and the autocorrelations of the absolute values of the returns are used to show that the returns are non-normal with time-varying volatility. We use the recently proposed data-driven exponentially weighted moving average (DDEWMA) volatility model to estimate the covariance matrix of asset returns in Markowitz portfolio optimization. Empirical results with big data (consists of 444 stocks for a period of 7 years downloaded from Yahoo Finance) show that the proposed DDEWMA variance covariance matrix model outperforms (larger Sharpe ratio) the model with empirical variance covariance matrix.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it