Maximizing Upside, Minimizing Downside Volatility
The speaker critiques Markowitz's efficient frontier model for treating all volatility equally, arguing that upside and downside volatility should be distinguished. Portfolio construction should focus on maximizing upside volatility while minimizing downside volatility through asymmetric risk management.
Summary
The speaker discusses limitations in traditional modern portfolio theory, specifically Markowitz's efficient frontier framework. While Markowitz optimized portfolios based on overall volatility metrics, the speaker argues this approach overlooks a critical distinction: not all volatility is equal. The speaker categorizes volatility into two types—upside volatility (positive price movements) and downside volatility (negative price movements)—and explains that good volatility and bad volatility have fundamentally different impacts on investor outcomes. The raw volatility number itself, while mathematically interesting, obscures this important nuance. To address this, the speaker introduces a framework that considers upside capture, downside capture, and the asymmetry between them. The strategic objective in portfolio construction is to incorporate specific ingredients or holdings that create an asymmetric risk-return profile, one that captures upside movements while protecting against downside movements. This approach represents a more sophisticated understanding of risk management than traditional variance-based optimization.
About this episode
Maximizing Upside, Minimizing Downside Volatility
Key Insights
- Markowitz's efficient frontier optimized on total volatility without distinguishing between upside volatility (good) and downside volatility (bad), missing a fundamental asymmetry in how investors experience price movements
- Overall volatility metrics are misleading because they don't capture the distinction between favorable and unfavorable price swings that actually matter to portfolio performance
- Portfolio optimization should focus on maximizing upside-downside asymmetry by selecting ingredients that increase upside capture while decreasing downside capture
Topics
Transcript
[0:00] It's there's upside and downside volatility. I often say that the efficient [music] frontier, you know, Markowitz was optimizing on volatility, but didn't optimize on the fact that there's good and bad volatility. One is much good volatility, upside volatility, and one less downside volatility. So, [music] the volatility number itself, while interesting, is is not as important as understanding that upside downside, you could think of it as upside volatility, downside volatility, upside capture, downside capture. And so, we are in a portfolio trying to incorporate ingredients that maximize [0:32] that upside downside asymmetry.
Full transcript available for MurmurCast members
Sign Up to AccessMore from How I Invest w/David Weisburd
The $3.4 Trillion Opportunity Nobody Sees
The private markets secondary sector, particularly in venture capital, represents a massive $3.4 trillion opportunity that remains severely undercapitalized. While buyout secondaries transact at 2.5-3% of NAV, venture secondaries represent less than 0.5% of the $3.4 trillion venture NAV, indicating significant untapped demand for secondary market investing.
The Compound Interest Nobody Talks About
The speaker emphasizes the power of compound growth in relationships and urges investors to resist chasing market trends. Instead, they advocate for staying focused on a specific market segment you're passionate about and deepening relationships with respected individuals in that space.
Why Investors Shouldn’t Box Themselves In
The speaker argues that investors should avoid self-imposed limitations on investment strategy types, as restricting to single approaches like fund investing, co-investing, or secondaries causes them to miss valuable opportunities. The optimal strategy is to pursue the greatest exposure to best-performing companies at attractive valuations with minimal fee drag.
Taxes: The Upstream Lever to Compounding
Taxes represent a significant drag on portfolio returns that wealth managers can actively minimize to keep more capital compounding over time. By focusing on tax-efficient strategies where outcomes are predictable, wealth managers can reduce the dispersion of potential results and improve client wealth outcomes.
The Governance Secret Behind Big Returns
A fund leader discusses how governance structures, particularly delegating investment authority to staff, drive returns in public funds. The speaker was attracted to modernizing a $100 billion fund with only 35 people by adopting a Canadian-style governance model and building internal asset management capabilities.