Risk Parity: A Modern Tool for Diversification

The purpose of this study is to examine how well risk parity works in terms of risk, return and diversification relative to more traditional minimum variance, 1/N and 60/40 portfolios. Risk parity portfolios were constituted of five risk sources; three common asset classes and two alternative beta investment strategies. The three common asset classes were equities, bonds and commodities, and the alternative beta investment strategies were carry trade and trend following. Risk parity portfolios were constructed using five different risk measures of which four were tail risk measures. The risk measures were standard deviation, Value-at-Risk, Expected Shortfall, modified Value-at-Risk and modified Expected Shortfall. We studied also how sensitive risk parity is to the choice of risk measure. The hypothesis is that risk parity portfolios provide better return with the same amount of risk and are better diversified than the benchmark portfolios. We used two data sets, monthly and weekly data. The monthly data was from the years 1989-2011 and the weekly data was from the years 2000-2011. Empirical studies showed that risk parity portfolios provide better diversification since the diversification is made at the risk level. Risk based portfolios provided superior return compared to the asset based portfolios. Using tail risk measures in risk parity portfolios do not necessarily provide better hedge from tail events than standard deviation.