Health Sector Portfolio Optimization Using the Markowitz Approach with Risk Aversion and Risk Tolerance Parameters

https://doi.org/10.47194/orics.v5i4.352

Authors

  • Muhammad Iqbal Al-Banna Ismail School of Mathematical Sciences, Sunway University, No.5, Jalan Universiti, Bandar Sunway, 47500 Subang Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia.
  • Dede Irman Pirdaus Faculty of computer science, University of informatics and business, Bandung, Indonesia

Abstract

This study analyzes the optimal portfolio formation of health sector stocks listed on the Indonesia Stock Exchange using the Markowitz approach with dual risk parameters. Unlike traditional mean-variance optimization, this research incorporates both risk aversion (ρ) and risk tolerance (τ) parameters to better accommodate varying investor risk preferences. Using daily closing price data from six health sector stocks during the period January 2022 to December 2023, this study employs web scraping techniques for data collection and implements portfolio optimization calculations. The results show that the dual risk parameters approach produces consistent portfolio weights across both risk measures, with SIDO.JK receiving the highest allocation (approximately 41.6%) followed by SOHO.JK (23.0%) and SILO.JK (16.9%). The efficient frontier analysis demonstrates portfolio risk ranges from 0.015 to 0.030 with returns between 0.10% to 0.45%. This study contributes to the literature by demonstrating how incorporating dual risk parameters can provide more nuanced portfolio allocations while maintaining the fundamental benefits of diversification.

References

Bartholdy, J., & Peare, P. (2005). Estimation of expected return: CAPM vs. Fama and French. International Review of Financial Analysis, 14(4), 407-427.

Becker, Y., Halffmann, P., & Schöbel, A. (2024). Risk management in multi-objective portfolio optimization under uncertainty. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.19936.

Bursa Efek Indonesia. (2024). Press Release Details. https://www.idx.co.id/en/news/press-release/2196

Fransisca, D. C., Sukono, Chaerani, D., & Halim, N. A. (2024). Robust Portfolio Mean-Variance Optimization for Capital Allocation in Stock Investment Using the Genetic Algorithm: A Systematic Literature Review. Computation, 12(8), 166.

Ganiarto, E., Komalasari, F., & Manik, L. E. L. M. (2021). Novice investor behavior in Indonesia stock exchange: A comparative study before and during Covid-19 Pandemic.

Irsan, M. Y. T., Priscilla, E., & Siswanto, S. (2022). Comparison of Variance Covariance and Historical Simulation Methods to Calculate Value At Risk on Banking Stock Portfolio. Jurnal Matematika, Statistika dan Komputasi, 19(1), 241-250.

Lu, Y. (2021). Research on the Application of Mean-Variance Model in Securities Investment Portfolio Planning: Evidence from China Stock Market. Available at SSRN 4393576.

Rajasekar, A., Pillai, A. R., Elangovan, R., & Parayitam, S. (2023). Risk capacity and investment priority as moderators in the relationship between big-five personality factors and investment behavior: a conditional moderated moderated-mediation model. Quality & Quantity, 57(3), 2091-2123.

Škarica, B., & Lukač, Z. (2012). A comparison of basic and extended markowitz model on croatian capital market. Croatian operational research review, 3(1), 236-244.

Tian, Y. (2023). A simple study of the applicability of the Markowitz model in the current stock market. BCP Business & Management, 44, 527–536. https://doi.org/10.54691/bcpbm.v44i.4882

Wu, Y., Huang, L., & Jiang, H. (2023). Optimization of large portfolio allocation for new-energy stocks: Evidence from China. Energy, 285, 129456.

Zhang, Y., Li, X., & Guo, S. (2018). Portfolio selection problems with Markowitz’s mean–variance framework: a review of literature. Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, 17, 125-158.

Published

2025-01-06

How to Cite

Ismail, M. I. A.-B., & Pirdaus, D. I. (2025). Health Sector Portfolio Optimization Using the Markowitz Approach with Risk Aversion and Risk Tolerance Parameters. Operations Research: International Conference Series, 5(4), 155–160. https://doi.org/10.47194/orics.v5i4.352