Search arXiv⌕ Search

arXiv · 2611.00578

Non-asymptotic analysis of SGLD with discontinuous stochastic gradients: a new route to portfolio CVaR minimization

Abstract

Conditional-Value-at-Risk (CVaR) optimization is a fundamental tool in portfolio selection, yet its nonsmooth loss structure poses a challenge for the existing theory of stochastic gradient methods including associated Langevin algorithms. In particular, the positive-part loss and the softmax portfolio parametrization lead to stochastic gradients that need not be globally Lipschitz continuous, but rather discontinuous, where available non-convex stochastic gradient Langevin dynamics (SGLD) guarantees often exhibit an unfavorable exponential dependence on the problem dimension. In this article, we develop a non-asymptotic analysis of SGLD for a regularized CVaR portfolio optimization problem. We exploit the geometric structure of the CVaR objective to establish linear growth, convexity-at-infinity, and one-sided Lipschitz properties of the stochastic gradient without imposing density assumptions on the asset losses that are typical in previous works. Crucially, the constants appearing in the aforementioned structural conditions are shown to be independent of the number of assets. Moreover, we establish a convergence bound in Wasserstein-2 distance with rate $\mathcal{O}(λ^{1/4})$ and a finite-time guarantee for the expected excess risk. Our analysis, together with the dimension-independent constants in the structural conditions, leads to an excess risk bound that depends linearly on the number of assets. Numerical experiments with simulated Gaussian portfolios exhibit the predicted dimension dependence. Computational comparisons with alternative stochastic optimization methods further illustrate the practical efficiency of SGLD for the optimization problem under consideration. Finally, we extend the framework to a broader class of non-convex stochastic optimization problems with discontinuous stochastic gradients.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Yan Ding, Sotirios Sabanis, Ying Zhang. 2026-10-31. Non-asymptotic analysis of SGLD with discontinuous stochastic gradients: a new route to portfolio CVaR minimization. https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.00578

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Breaking the Trend: How to Avoid Cherry-Picked Signals

Our empirical results show an excellent fit with the theoretical Sharpe formula of a trend-following strategy depending on the parameter of the signal, which was derived by by Grebenkov and Serror (2014). That empirical fit convinces us that a mean-reversion process with only one time scale is enough to model, in a precise way, the reality of the trend-following mechanism at the average scale of CTAs and as a consequence, using only one simple EMA, appears optimal to capture the trend. As a consequence, using a complex basket of different sophisticated indicators as signal, does not seem to be so rational or optimal and exposes to the risk of cherry-picking.

q-fin.PM↗

Mitigating Return Drag and Regime Whipsaws in Sector Rotation: An Asymmetric Downside-Aware Nested Clustered Optimization Framework

Hierarchical clustering and Nested Clustered Optimization (NCO) mitigate the mathematical ill-conditioning of classical Markowitz covariance matrices. However, two structural vulnerabilities persist in equity markets: (1) symmetric variance penalizes upside and downside return dispersion identically, inducing acute return drag against soaring momentum sectors; and (2) unconstrained Hidden Markov Models (HMM) exhibit hyper-active regime switching (whipsaw instability), incurring excessive turnover and transaction drag. We propose Asymmetric Downside-Risk Nested Clustered Optimization with Sticky Regime Dynamics (Asym-Sticky-NCO) for tactical sector rotation across all 11 S&P 500 GICS sectors. The framework substitutes symmetric covariance with the Bawa-Lindenberg downside semi-covariance matrix across both hierarchical tree clustering and two-stage allocation. Furthermore, we introduce a Sticky Gaussian HMM incorporating a diagonal self-transition persistence prior (\k{appa}) and confidence-adaptive boundaries (δ) to enforce macroeconomic persistence. Strictly non-anticipative walk-forward backtesting across 65 out-of-sample months (August 2020 to December 2025) demonstrates that the architecture elevates CAGR from 10.65% (Plain NCO) to 13.41% (+276 bps/year), delivers a 97.74% total return versus 72.99%, suppresses maximum drawdown to 14.22% (versus 23.93% for the S&P 500), and achieves a Calmar ratio of 0.94 (+38.2% over S&P 500; +84.3% over Baseline Regime-NCO). Crucially, sticky dynamics cut regime whipsaws by 75.0% (from 16 to 4 switches) and reduce monthly turnover from 60.78% to 30.48%, addressing core limitations of machine learning asset allocation.

q-fin.PM↗

Interpretable Allocation and Model-Predictive Rebalancing of Equity Portfolios, Tested on Real and Synthetic Markets

A live equity portfolio poses three problems: which stocks to hold, when to trade, and whether the strategy holds up beyond the observed market. We built one system for all three and tested it on 373 US equities, calibrated on 2014-2024 and traded from January 2025 to September 2026. A selection rule chose stocks by score, by a bandit, or at random, and one of seven weighting rules, four consumer-theory utilities, and three standard portfolios, set share counts under limits on budget, single-stock weight, portfolio volatility, and turnover, with each stock's preference weight a bounded score of its trend, market beta, and the market's recent direction. A model-predictive controller forecasts portfolio value with a multi-asset geometric Brownian motion and re-planned at its horizon, when the value left its forecast band, or at a drawdown stop. To probe deeper declines than the real window held, we also ran the system on simulated markets from per-asset hidden Markov generators with jumps, linked by market and sector factors. On real prices, the stocks chosen mattered more to terminal wealth than the weighting rule, and the early re-plans shrank the worst drawdown in most rule combinations against a fixed calendar without consistently raising wealth. In the deepest simulated declines, every combination, random picks included, ended above simulated SPY and the equal-weight universe in the median, even without early re-plans, so the margin came from shared parts of the system, not from stock selection or re-plan timing. A market hedge that tightened a beta cap as the market weakened cost wealth on real prices but paid off in the most sustained simulated declines, and the generator's persistent trends favored score-based selection more than the real market did, which suggests a synthetic test judges stock selection fairly only if its generator does not build in that persistence.

q-fin.PM↗