Skip to content
All library documents

Return Bounds on Constrained and Unconstrained Markowitz Frontiers

Article Quant Q&A · Author: Sid24

Summary

The document explains how target expected return serves as an input to mean–variance portfolio optimization and discusses its attainable range under different weight constraints. With short selling allowed and unrestricted borrowing, the response describes the model’s maximum target return as unbounded, while noting that practical frontier plots use a finite range. When weights must be nonnegative and sum to one, the maximum attainable expected return is the highest expected return among the available assets, reached by allocating entirely to that asset.

For the lower end of the efficient frontier, the response points to the global minimum variance portfolio’s expected return. It also distinguishes efficient from inefficient frontier portfolios and mentions that the tangency portfolio can help choose a useful plotting range. A second answer shifts attention from maximum return to maximum Sharpe ratio, presenting a Hansen–Jagannathan bound based on stochastic discount factor volatility relative to its mean and outlining an empirical estimation approach. These conclusions depend on model assumptions and the investable asset set; the document does not provide data or a worked portfolio example.

Key ideas

  • The target return is an input to Markowitz optimization, not a fixed output of the model.
  • With unrestricted short selling, the document treats attainable target returns as unbounded under its stated assumptions.
  • With nonnegative weights summing to one, the highest attainable expected return equals the best-returning asset’s mean.
  • The global minimum variance portfolio provides a reference point for the lower end of the efficient frontier.
  • A Hansen–Jagannathan relation bounds the maximum Sharpe ratio using stochastic discount factor variation.

Tags

Full text
# Max allowable return in Markowitz model


# Max allowable return in Markowitz model












The Markowitz model solves the following problem: The portfolio with the smallest variance among attainable portfolios with expected return µV.

Here we have to choose µV to get the optimal portfolio weights.

My question is: What are the bounds on the values that µV can take? In particular, what is the maximum possible attainable return µV?

## Answer by develarist (score 1, accepted)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/46253

The Markowitz mean-variance model takes in some target expected portfolio return $\mu_T$ as an input and returns optimal portfolio weights $\boldsymbol\omega$ that minimize risk for that return. Repeating this for a series of target returns, $\boldsymbol\mu_T$, manifests two different efficient frontier curves (series of efficient portfolios) depending on the investment scenario:

- Unconstrained efficient frontier (short-selling allowed), thick line

- Constrained efficient frontier (short-selling forbidden), dotted line

The optimization problem for the unconstrained efficient frontier (1) is: \begin{equation} \begin{aligned}[l] \hat{\boldsymbol{\omega}}(\mu_T) = &\min_{\boldsymbol{\omega}} \boldsymbol{\omega}^{\top} \hat{\mathbf{\Sigma}} \boldsymbol{\omega} & \\ s.t. \enspace & \boldsymbol{\omega}^{\top}\boldsymbol{\mu} = \mu_T\\ & \boldsymbol{\omega}^{\top}\boldsymbol{\iota}_N = 1 & \\ \end{aligned} \end{equation}

The optimization problem for the constrained efficient frontier (2) is: \begin{equation} \begin{aligned}[l] \hat{\boldsymbol{\omega}}(\mu_T) = &\min_{\boldsymbol{\omega}} \boldsymbol{\omega}^{\top} \hat{\mathbf{\Sigma}} \boldsymbol{\omega} & \\ s.t. \enspace & \boldsymbol{\omega}^{\top}\boldsymbol{\mu} = \mu_T\\ & \boldsymbol{\omega}^{\top}\boldsymbol{\iota}_N = 1 & \\ & \omega_n\in \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}\enspace \forall N & \end{aligned} \end{equation}

The last line shown is the non-negativity constraint for the no short-sales frontier. As long as mean-variance model assumptions are active and standard deviation of each asset is positive, as well as the mean of the asset means vector, $\boldsymbol\mu$, then:

The maximum return on the unconstrained frontier is $\mu=\infty$, although realistically there is a feasible limit to which you would try values for $\mu_T$ to generate a good-enough mean-variance graph, knowing that the unconstrained curve peters out at some level of $\mu$ the higher you go, but still increases at a diminishing rate.

The maximum return on the constrained frontier is max($\boldsymbol\mu$), that is, the expected return of the asset in the investment pool that has the highest expected return. For example, if asset #3 of $N=10$ total assets has an expected return of 5%, you would plug $\mu_T=5\%$ into optimization problem 2 and get back the farthest point, in mean-variance space, where the constrained frontier ends, which is a 100% allocation to the max-return asset (asset #3), or single-asset portfolio. Oracle's stock, shown in the figure, is a separate example that clearly shows the end of the constrained curve.

Normally, neither the unconstrained nor the short-sale constrained efficient frontiers end at the tangency (maximum Sharpe ratio) portfolio, but knowing the location of the tangency on both curves can serve as a guideline as to what cap to place on the highest feasible $\mu_T$ used for tracing the unconstrained frontier (1), knowing that the unconstrained tangency normally has a higher \mu than the constrained tangency. Otherwise, plotting the unconstrained frontier together with the constrained frontier (2) will likely show the constrained one being squashed horizontally relative to the potentially much wider unconstrained one. As for the height of the two frontiers, the unconstrained frontier (1) is normally taller than the constrained frontier (2).

Everything explained so far addresses the upper bound for both frontiers. For the lower bound $\mu_T$ on both, try the global minimum variance (GMV) portfolio that removes the target return constraint. The GMV is a frontier portfolio, but technically is not an efficient portfolio (neither is it an inefficient one):

\begin{equation} \begin{aligned}[l] \hat{\boldsymbol{\omega}}_{GMV} = &\min_{\boldsymbol{\omega}} \boldsymbol{\omega}^{\top} \hat{\mathbf{\Sigma}} \boldsymbol{\omega} & \\ s.t. \enspace & \boldsymbol{\omega}^{\top}\boldsymbol{\iota}_N = 1 & \\ \end{aligned} \end{equation}

Since the inefficient frontier is conceptually an upside-down mirror image of the efficient frontier, you can otherwise try values less than $\mu_{GMV}$ such as the negatives of the upper bound target-returns you decided to use for the efficient frontier: $-\mu_T$.

## Answer by phdstudent (score 2)

https://quant.stackexchange.com/a/46191

The maximum attainable return is unbounded as in the model you can borrow without limit. However, what matters in that model is what is the maximum sharpe ratio you can attain.

That has bounds, which are given by the Hansen-Jagannathan distance.

Let me show you what the JH distance looks like. From the law of one price:

\begin{equation} 1 = E [R_{i,t+1} m^\star_{t+1}] \end{equation}

Therefore:

\begin{equation} 1 = E(R_{i,t+1}) E(m^\star_{t+1}) + Corr(R_{i,t+1}, m^\star_{t+1}) Std(R_{i,t+1}) Std(m^\star_{t+1}) \end{equation}

Rewrite the equation above using $R_{f,t+1} = 1/E(m^\star_{t+1})$ to get:

\begin{equation} \frac{E(R_{i,t+1}) - R_{f,t+1}}{Std(R_{i,t+1}) } \leq \frac{Std(m^\star_{t+1})}{E(m^\star_{t+1})} \end{equation}

The left hand side equation is the maximum attainable sharpe ratio. And the equation on the right gives you the bound so: The max Sharpe ratio in the economy is then bounded by the minimum variance SDF volatility over mean!

How do we use these?

- Take $N$ assets. Compute excess returns.

- Estimate variance covariance matrix of returns $\Sigma = E[R R']$ and average payoffs $E(R_{t+1})$. Usually the first one we estimate by taking a large sample and computing covariance matrix and the latter just by averaging returns.

- Plot the above locus and compare with your candidate SDF;

The locus should deliver something like this:

Shown in full with attribution under the source's licence. Licence: CC BY-SA 4.0 (Stack Exchange)

This summary was written by Stratmill's research agent from the original; it is not a copy of the source.