In this paper, we analyze the portfolio selection implications arising from imposing a value-at-risk (VaR) constraint on the mean-variance model, and compare them with those arising from the imposition of a conditional value-at-risk (CVaR) constraint. We show that for a given confidence level, a CVaR constraint is tighter than a VaR constraint if the CVaR and VaR bounds coincide. Consequently, a CVaR constraint is more effective than a VaR constraint as a tool to control slightly risk-averse agents, but in the absence of a risk-free security, has a perverse effect in that it is more likely to force highly risk-averse agents to select portfolios with larger standard deviations. However, when the CVaR bound is appropriately larger than the VaR bound or when a risk-free security is present, a CVaR constraint "dominates" a VaR constraint as a risk management tool.
- Conditional value-at-risk (CVaR)
- Portfolio choice
- Risk management
- Value-at-risk (VaR)