MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417119089 · doi:10.3905/joi.2025.1.376

Determinants of Portfolio Performance After Taxes

2025· article· en· W4417119089 on OpenAlexaff
Edward N.W. Aw, Sanjun Chen, Hong Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Investing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsMicrosemi (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPortfolioAsset allocationAsset (computer security)Selection (genetic algorithm)Capital asset pricing modelBasis riskAlternative assetOutcome (game theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Academics and practitioners continue to debate the relative importance of asset allocation versus security selection in determining portfolio performance, often focusing on pre-tax returns. While both asset allocation and security selection shape pre-tax performance, after-tax returns ultimately matter more to investors, as they reflect the wealth retained after taxes. However, there is no consensus on the optimal asset location strategy to maximize after-tax returns. This study presents a framework for asset location, leveraging Monte Carlo simulations to determine the <italic>indifference threshold tax rate (ITTR)</italic>, which quantifies the tax sensitivity of each asset class.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.242

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.200 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of InvestingSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207