5.5.9 · Stock-Market › Portfolio Theory
Dono ratios wahi core question ka jawab dete hain jo Sharpe ratio poochta hai — "maine risk ke har unit ke badle kitna extra return kamaya?" — lekin ye dono "risk" ki definition ko denominator mein badal dete hain.
Sortino : sirf downside risk (buri volatility) count karta hai, kyunki upside surprises tumhe hurt nahi karte .
Treynor : sirf systematic risk (β , market risk) count karta hai, kyunki diversifiable risk free mein eliminate ho sakta hai .
YE KYUN MATTER KARTA HAI: Sharpe ek investment ko upar jaane ke liye utna hi punish karta hai jitna neeche jaane ke liye. Ye galat lagta hai — tumhe upside pasand hai! Aur Sharpe total volatility use karta hai, lekin ek well-diversified investor sirf us risk ki parwah karta hai jo wo diversify nahi kar sakta . Ye do ratios un do blind spots ko fix karte hain.
HAR RATIO KYA CHANGE KARTA HAI: numerator (excess return) wahi rakho, denominator badlo.
Ratio
Denominator
Kaun sa risk measure karta hai
Sharpe
σ p (total std)
saari volatility
Sortino
σ d (downside deviation)
sirf buri volatility
Treynor
β p (portfolio beta)
sirf market/systematic risk
Definition Downside deviation
Mean se deviation measure karne ki jagah, hum sirf un returns ke liye deviation measure karte hain jo ek target T se neeche hain (aksar T = R f , ya T = 0 ). T se upar ke returns zero contribute karte hain.
HUM ISSE SCRATCH SE KAISE BANATE HAIN. Ordinary variance hai:
σ 2 = N 1 ∑ i = 1 N ( R i − R ˉ ) 2
Har squared term positive hai chahe R i mean se upar ho ya neeche — yahi problem hai. Hum sirf shortfalls ko penalize karna chahte hain. Shortfall define karo:
min ( 0 , R i − T )
Ye 0 hai jab R i ≥ T (acha) aur negative hai jab R i < T (bura). Ise square karo, average karo, root lo:
Intuition Total risk = systematic + unsystematic
σ p 2 = systematic β p 2 σ m 2 + diversifiable σ ε 2
Ek diversified investor bahut saare assets hold karke σ ε 2 → 0 kar deta hai free mein . Isliye unhe sirf systematic risk uthane ke liye reward milna chahiye, jo β se capture hota hai. Unhe σ ε ke liye charge karna (jaisa Sharpe karta hai) unfair hai.
CAPM se β yaad karo: β p = σ m 2 Cov ( R p , R m ) — portfolio market ke har unit move par kitna move karta hai.
Worked example Raw returns se Sortino
Monthly returns: { + 8% , − 4% , + 6% , − 10% , + 2% } . Target T = 0% . Mean R p = 5 8 − 4 + 6 − 10 + 2 = 0.4% .
Step 1 — sirf shortfalls. Sirf < 0 wale returns rakho: − 4 aur − 10 . Ye step kyun? Upside (+ 8 , + 6 , + 2 ) downside risk mein 0 contribute karta hai.
Step 2 — saare N par square & average. σ d 2 = 5 ( − 4 ) 2 + ( − 10 ) 2 = 5 16 + 100 = 23.2 . N=5 se divide kyun, 2 se nahi? Convention: hum poore sample par average karte hain taaki losses ki frequency matter kare, sirf unka size nahi.
Step 3 — root. σ d = 23.2 ≈ 4.82% .
Step 4 — ratio. Sortino = 4.82 0.4 − 0 ≈ 0.083 .
Worked example Treynor comparison — punchline
Fund A: R p = 12% , β = 1.5 . Fund B: R p = 10% , β = 0.8 . R f = 4% .
Treynor A = 1.5 12 − 4 = 5.33
Treynor B = 0.8 10 − 4 = 7.50
B kyun jeetta hai kam raw return ke bawajood: market risk ke har unit lene par, B zyada excess return deliver karta hai. A ka zyada return kaafi had tak extra market leverage (β ) se "kharida" gaya hai.
Worked example Same fund, teen ratios
Fund: R p = 11% , R f = 3% , σ p = 20% , σ d = 12% , β = 1.2 .
Sharpe = 8/20 = 0.40
Sortino = 8/12 = 0.67
Treynor = 8/1.2 = 6.67
Yahan Sortino > Sharpe ⇒ fund ki volatility zyaatar upside hai (acha), isliye Sharpe ne ise understate kiya.
Common mistake "Sortino sirf negative returns ko average karne ke liye use karta hai, isliye
negatives ki sankhya se divide karo."
Ye sahi kyun lagta hai: tumne 2 losses filter kiye, isliye 2 se divide karna natural lagta hai. Fix: standard convention total N se divide karta hai. Losses ki count se divide karne par ek fund jo rarely crash karta hai riskier lagega, jo ulta hai — tum chahte ho ki frequent-but-small losses low downside risk lage.
Common mistake "Higher Treynor hamesha higher Sharpe fund ko beat karta hai."
Ye sahi kyun lagta hai: dono "return per risk" hain. Fix: Ye alag-alag risks measure karte hain. Treynor tabhi valid hai jab portfolio well-diversified ho (taki σ ε ≈ 0 ). Ek undiversified single stock ke liye, Treynor misleading hai — Sharpe/Sortino use karo.
Common mistake "Negative Sharpe/Sortino ko normally rank kiya ja sakta hai."
Ye sahi kyun lagta hai: ye phir bhi ek number hai. Fix: jab excess return negative ho, ek bada denominator ratio ko kam negative banata hai, isliye ek riskier fund spuriously upar rank ho sakta hai. Negative ratios ko bahut carefully compare karo.
Common mistake "Downside deviation sirf negative returns ka std hai."
Ye sahi kyun lagta hai: dono mein losses involve hain. Fix: ye target T se deviation hai (losses ke mean se nahi), aur sirf shortfalls count hote hain — formula min ( 0 , R i − T ) use karta hai, R i − R ˉ nahi.
Recall Khud test karo (try karne ke baad kholo)
Numerator teeno ratios mein same hai — wo kya hai? → excess return R p − R f (ya R p − T ).
Sortino denominator? → downside deviation σ d .
Treynor denominator? → beta β p .
Treynor sahi choice kab hai? → jab portfolio well-diversified ho.
Sortino ko Sharpe se prefer kyun karein? → ye upside volatility ignore karta hai, jo investors ko darr nahi lagata.
Recall Feynman: ek 12-saal ke bachche ko samjhao
Socho ek rollercoaster ko "kitna scary hai" ke basis par grade kar rahe ho. Sharpe har bump ko scary count karta hai — chahe wo fun wala upar ka jhonka ho. Ye silly hai, tumhe upar ke jhonke pasand hain! Sortino sirf scary girna count karta hai. Treynor kehta hai: kuch bumps park ki har ride mein hote hain (ye "market" hai), aur kuch bumps tum smarter track chunkar avoid kar sakte ho — Treynor tumhe sirf un park-wide bumps ke liye charge karta hai jo tum dodge nahi kar sakte. Teeno phir bhi yehi poochhte hain: "mazze (extra return) ke liye mujhe scariness ke har unit par kitna milta hai?"
Mnemonic Denominators yaad karo
S ortino → S hortfall (sirf downside). T reynor → T he market (beta). Sharpe → S tandard deviation (sab kuch). "Same top, swap the bottom."
Sortino, Treynor aur Sharpe teeno numerator mein kya share karte hain? Excess return R p − R f (Sortino ek target T bhi use kar sakta hai).
Sortino ratio formula ( R p − T ) / σ d jahan σ d downside deviation hai.
Downside deviation formula σ d = N 1 ∑ [ min ( 0 , R i − T ) ] 2 .
Sortino sirf downside deviation kyun use karta hai? Upside volatility investors ki help karta hai, isliye sirf buri (target se neeche) volatility risk count honi chahiye.
Treynor ratio formula ( R p − R f ) / β p .
Treynor total std ki jagah beta kyun use karta hai? Sirf systematic (undiversifiable) risk ke liye reward milna chahiye; diversifiable risk free mein remove ho sakta hai.
Total variance ka decomposition σ p 2 = β p 2 σ m 2 + σ ε 2 (systematic + diversifiable).
Treynor appropriate ratio kab hai? Well-diversified portfolios ke liye jahan unsystematic risk ≈ 0 ho.
Downside deviation mein N se divide karte hain ya losses ki sankhya se? Total N se (standard convention).
Agar kisi fund ke liye Sortino > Sharpe ho, toh iska kya matlab hai? Uski volatility zyaatar upside hai, isliye Sharpe ne performance understate ki.
Beta ki definition β p = Cov ( R p , R m ) / σ m 2 , portfolio ki market moves ke saath sensitivity.
Sharpe Ratio — parent formula; Sortino & Treynor variants hain.
CAPM — β ka source jo Treynor mein use hota hai.
Systematic vs Unsystematic Risk — Treynor ke denominator ko justify karta hai.
Diversification — kyun unsystematic risk khatam ho jaata hai.
Standard Deviation and Variance — downside deviation ki neenv.
Risk-Adjusted Performance Measures — wo family jinse ye belong karte hain.
Excess return Rp minus Rf
Downside deviation sigma_d
Shortfall min 0, Ri minus T
Cov Rp,Rm over sigma_m squared
Diversifiable risk removed for free