Asset allocation efficiency from dynamic and static strategies
| Annual rate of return | Volatility | Sharpe ratio | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simulation I | Dynamic asset allocation | 6.37% | 4.53% | 0.86 |
| Static asset allocation | 5.71% | 4.04% | 0.79 | |
| Simulation II | Dynamic asset allocation | 6.30% | 4.54% | 0.95 |
| Static asset allocation | 6.16% | 4.92% | 0.85 | |
| Simulation III | Dynamic asset allocation | 6.81% | 6.25% | 0.77 |
| Static asset allocation | 6.64% | 6.13% | 0.76 | |
| Annual rate of return | Volatility | Sharpe ratio | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Simulation I | Dynamic asset allocation | 6.37% | 4.53% | 0.86 |
| Static asset allocation | 5.71% | 4.04% | 0.79 | |
| Simulation II | Dynamic asset allocation | 6.30% | 4.54% | 0.95 |
| Static asset allocation | 6.16% | 4.92% | 0.85 | |
| Simulation III | Dynamic asset allocation | 6.81% | 6.25% | 0.77 |
| Static asset allocation | 6.64% | 6.13% | 0.76 | |
Note(s): This table shows the annual rate of returns and Sharpe ratio of the two asset allocation methods. Simulation I is an asset allocation based on the original forecasting data by the VAR model, and Simulation II is carried out by adding filtering to the economic indicators, setting new upper and lower bands of economic indicators and raising the lower and upper limits of stock weights by 10%. Simulation III is conducted by increasing the lower and upper bounds of stocks and alternative investments to 20 and 40%, respectively, as well as lowering the domestic bonds to 10 and 30% in addition to filtering
Sharing content requires targeting cookies to be enabled. Please update your cookie preferences to use this feature.