Papers

Nested clustered optimization allocates within each cluster from the cluster's own covariance block and then across the resulting cluster portfolios. Block inversion says the unconstrained minimum-variance portfolio has the same two-tier shape, with each block replaced by its Schur complement against every other asset. Conditioning instead on one knot from each other cluster truncates the conditioning set in the manner of a Vecchia approximation, and we give the rank-one model of cross-cluster dependence under which it is exact. Damping the complement by $\gamma\in[0,1]$ then gives a bridge with nested clustered optimization at $\gamma=0$ and the global optimum at $\gamma=1$, with no linear solve larger than a cluster or the number of clusters. Under estimation error the optimal $\gamma$ can be strictly interior and full coupling can remain optimal, and we give the local theorem at the minimum-variance end with exact examples of both, including a symmetric family in which the optimum is a closed form.

In a statistical factor model, principal components (or eigenvectors) of a sample covariance matrix serve as estimates of principal directions, the true drivers of co-movement of a collection of observed variables. We write the often substantial error in these estimates as a sum of two interpretable terms, which we show have almost sure asymptotic limits as the number of variables grows with sample size bounded. This scenario is commonplace in financial economics, genomics, machine learning and signal processing. Out-of-subspace error measures the distance from an estimate to the subspace spanned by population factor exposures. It can be expressed in terms of data, providing an estimable floor for error. In-subspace error arises from the fixed sample size of the latent factor returns and cannot be estimated from data alone. We illustrate our error analysis with a three-factor simulation of the US public equity market, showing the dependence of the magnitude of the error and its components on dimension and sample size. In that simulation, out-of-subspace error dominates. Researchers who rely on principal component analysis to estimate factor models can use our results to quantify errors in model-based predictions and attributions.

We study libraries of cross-sectional signals: at each date, a forecast vector over $d$ assets intended to predict the next period's cross-sectional return. Demeaned and unit-normalized, a signal is a point on a sphere and its $T$-date history a point on a product of $T$ spheres. A pairwise correlation cap on histories is a minimum angular separation on that product, so growing a library under such a cap is a packing problem. If a large library is not too pairwise correlated and is equally weighted, does the equally weighted sum (EWS) tend to a known principal-component quantity as it grows? We answer this under explicit assumptions on how the library is filled. Separation alone guarantees nothing: it fixes no limiting distribution; a saturated library covers the sphere yet can carry a biased count; and near-maximum packing on a fixed domain forces uniform volume, which on the unrestricted sphere gives zero mean and no distinguished principal component (PC1). Alignment depends on the admission rule and candidate distribution. Under the uniform product-volume benchmark, screening on positive average information coefficient (IC) yields a nonzero, target-aligned mean but an isotropic second moment, whereas a positive IC margin $\beta$ makat every finite $T$, with athree-level spectrum whose leading eigenvalue tends to $\beta^2$ while residual levels decay as $1/T$; margins of order $T^{-1/2}$ keep a positive admission rate but a vanishing eigengA finite residual-spectrum criteS-PC1 alignment.Gilbert-Varshamov codes show separation permits both outcomes: exponentially large positive-IC libraries exist whose EWS is PC1, and others whose EWS is orthogonal to PC1. $\log J=o(T)$ suffices for uniform estimation among $J$ candidates from $T$ iid dates. Derived results are proved and checked numerically; no market data are used.

Special Markowitz (SM) regularises returns and covariance jointly, relative to a reference state (mu_ref, Sigma_ref). Each eigendirection of the whitened relative operator carries a signed spectral potential Phi_k, with persistence factor psi_k = exp(-Phi_k) > 0. Positive potentials attenuate empirical deviations from the reference geometry, zero potential preserves them, and negative potentials amplify them. The persistence factor psi_k governs both the return signal and the covariance deviation: the regularised deviation from the reference is psi_k times the empirical deviation. The logarithmic potential coordinate is characterised by a multiplicative composition law on the multiplicative group of positive real numbers; the Stein loss is characterised as the unique free-energy density (within a natural class) compatible with the resulting coupling. The SM pressure functional is additive across modes the defining property of Special Markowitz.

We study whether causal risk mandates constructed from overlapping information blocks can be implemented by one self-financing portfolio that is optimal under pooled information. In an incomplete continuous Brownian market, signal-responsive exposures are projected onto traded Brownian directions and embedded as closed subspaces of a predictable Hilbert space. Each causal mandate is the attainable projection of an identified, baseline-centered intervention surface and is therefore fixed upstream of the allocator. A first exact decomposition separates non-traded structural response, incompatibility across local mandates, and distortion of the common traded book. A fusion operator corrects duplication of common risk directions. The main theorem shows that exact causal decentralization holds if and only if the pooled enlargement preserves reference martingales, the pooled optimum has no component outside the additive desk span, the local causal shadows are compatible with one common book, and that book equals the additive pooled optimum. Under immersion, log-growth regret separates into pooled-interaction loss and common-book distortion, while raw causal implementation error also contains non-attainability and incompatibility. No common benchmark can reduce incompatibility. We derive the unique allocation under a quadratic causal-mandate penalty and exact comparative statics in a two-desk model with shared, desk-specific, and pooled-interaction risk. Additional results cover joint interventions, representation stability, admissible coalitions, and a covariance-weighted continuous-semimartingale formulation. The conclusions are partial-equilibrium statements for continuous markets.

We develop a diffusion-model framework for dynamic implied-volatility surface generation and evaluate its economic usefulness through data-driven hedging. The framework consists of two models. AD-Seq-Vol jointly learns the conditional evolution of the underlying asset return and the high-dimensional implied-volatility surface, generating adapted multi-period scenarios by sequentially updating the realized market history. AD-Seq-Vol-FT further incorporates option-market structure through post-training penalties for violations of static no-arbitrage conditions. Using daily SPX option data from 2000 to 2023, we show that the proposed models generate coherent surface trajectories while capturing both cross-sectional and temporal dependence. AD-Seq-Vol produces fewer and less severe static-arbitrage violations than the training data and the GAN-based benchmark, while AD-Seq-Vol-FT reduces these violations to nearly zero. We then integrate the generated conditional scenarios into an optimization-based hedging framework. Compared to a range of classical and data-driven benchmarks, the diffusion-based hedges maintain tracking errors near zero, substantially reduce tail risk, and exhibit particularly stable performance during the COVID-19 market disruption. These results establish Adaptive Sequential Diffusion Models as a promising class of market-consistent and economically useful financial scenario generators. Our code is available at: https://github.com/yinbinhan/volatility-surface-simulation.

An ensemble of roughly 3,000 signals over 20 assets was reported to have approximately 90% correlation with the leading component of the asset-space return structure. Does having about 158 signals per available linear dimension explain that alignment? The population answer depends on the research process's design distribution and its relation to returns: crowding alone imposes neither a nonzero mean nor agreement with a principal component. The population theory developed here distinguishes four objects: the equal-weight signal, signal principal components, equal-weight profit and loss (PnL), and PnL principal components. The return operator in the motivating observation is a separate object. Independent libraries converge to their design mean; exchangeable libraries can retain a random conditional mean. Cross-sectional signals over $d$ assets, once demeaned and normalized, lie on the unit sphere $S^{q-1}$ of a $q$-dimensional space, $q=d-1$. Under axial symmetry, their nonzero mean is signal-cloud PC1 exactly when its longitudinal second moment exceeds $1/q$, the isotropic energy share. Residual-and-gap bounds quantify approximate alignment. Combining design weights into signals contracts the tangent of their angle to PC1 to at most $\sqrt{\lambda_2/\lambda_1}$ times its value, where $\lambda_1>\lambda_2$ are the leading signal-kernel eigenvalues; the factor is sharp. A target-aligned frame separates transverse signal geometry, which PnL discards, from dispersion weighting and temporal centering, which also change the spectrum. A reproducible synthetic example illustrates the geometric threshold, and a proposed empirical program separates library growth from limited-history estimation. No market-data empirical results are presented.

Mean–variance portfolio choice takes the conditioning information as given and optimizes over weights, so two errors about that information pass into the portfolio unseen: using variables unavailable at the decision time and treating common variation as idiosyncratic. We make the conditioning information a decision variable subject to hard admissibility constraints declared in advance: availability, a no-arbitrage-preserving enlargement of the decision filtration, statistical separation and, for interventional claims, invariance across declared regimes. A lexicographic admissibility order in which no risk–return quantity enters selects an optimal information class, and the classical problem is solved inside it. We prove existence, invariance under recodings, and a value-of-admissible-information theorem whose failure conditions show that selection by decision loss admits look-ahead information whenever present; the two-stage solution and the joint envelope are the minimal elements of two orders on one set. Under exact separation the diversifiable part of risk is a property of the admissible class and is interventionally stable only under interventional admissibility; requiring causal identification carries an explicit oracle price traded against search complexity. The estimator is consistent with second-order regret. On market data with 127 candidate drivers the condition is attainable on individual equities, where enlarging the search reduces the defect at a measurable rate, and not on pre-diversified portfolios, where it is nearly invariant to the search because the residual dependence is the common factor itself. Where it fails, the covariance still yields minimum-variance portfolios that match shrinkage at markedly lower turnover while discarding a measurable part of their risk, which an exact decomposition attributes to the residual share, breadth and average residual correlation.

Commodity futures are shaped by harvest cycles, weather shocks, storage conditions, and seasonal demand, but it remains unclear whether recurring patterns yield robust out-of-sample trading profits. Existing research documents return seasonality in commodity futures as well as more complex seasonal structure, while leaving less evidence on how alternative seasonal models compare under common implementation constraints. This article compares dummy-variable regression (DVR), Singular Spectrum Analysis (SSA), and robust low-rank SSA (RLSSA) within a unified trading framework, including a volatility-normalised specification. Using monthly delivery-avoidance returns for 15 liquid commodity futures, the models are estimated on rolling ten-year windows and evaluated from 2016 to 2024 with transaction costs, an equal-weight long benchmark, and Maximum Entropy Bootstrap (MEB) assessment. Across 500 MEB paths, the benchmark has the strongest average full-period profile, with a cumulative return of 16.81%, a Sharpe ratio of 0.191, and a maximum drawdown of -0.414. Classical SSA has the strongest average model outcomes, but negative median cumulative returns and deep drawdowns indicate substantial path sensitivity. Volatility normalisation reduces the average DVR short loss but generally weakens SSA-based portfolios. None of the 18 approximate paired MEB Sharpe tests rejects after within-family Holm adjustment. Because MEB preserves each contract's temporal rank ordering, the assessment is conditional on observed timing rather than a timing-randomised seasonal null. The evidence does not establish robust benchmark outperformance and shows that model performance varies materially across market subperiods.

We develop Entropic Value-at-Risk (EVaR) parity for tempered stable returns. EVaR-based inverse risk parity (IRP) and equal risk contribution (ERC) portfolios are constructed using multivariate normal tempered stable models and independent component analysis with tempered stable components. We derive the corresponding asset-level EVaR and EVaR-deviation contributions and use the latter to separate the fitted location term from EVaR risk contributions. Under Gaussian returns, EVaR-deviation IRP and ERC recover conventional volatility IRP and ERC weights. We evaluate the resulting portfolios in three investment universes. Empirically, EVaR-based ERC portfolios achieve positive Sharpe differences relative to equal weight across the universes.

Signal correlation and PnL correlation are correlations over different index sets - across assets at each date versus across dates for scalar payoffs - and practitioners often treat the first as a proxy for the second. We give an exact decomposition that shows what that proxy sees and what it discards. We recall that at each date a normalized signal's projection onto the realized demeaned return direction is its realized cross-sectional Pearson IC, so that fixed-signal PnL is return dispersion times IC (Qian and Hua, 2004), and we identify the normalized similarity of two signals in the orthogonal complement as their partial correlation controlling for realized returns; the residual rotational freedom is an orthogonal gauge whose invariants are the transverse Gram matrix. Signal correlation therefore equals an uncentered IC cross-moment plus transverse similarity, while Pearson PnL correlation centers and dispersion-weights the IC series alone. Our main result is a non-identifiability theorem: absent constraints on transverse geometry, neither correlation bounds or orders the other, which sharpens the simulation finding of Sorensen, Qian, Schoen, and Hua (2004) into an exact statement. For normalized ensembles the transverse Gram matrix re-enters through the normalization denominator; the ex post optimal combination under Euclidean and general covariance-risk metrics is the classical multiple-correlation bound, and we show that the two rules agree for every longitudinal exposure if and only if the risk metric is isotropic on the signal span. The classical exact null law of partial correlation under isotropy, a synthetic mechanism illustration at weak-IC scales, and inference guidance under temporal dependence complete the treatment.

For more than four decades, the 60/40 stock/bond portfolio has served as a benchmark for delivering reasonable returns without excessive risk. More recently, a 50/30/20 stock/bond/alternative portfolio has been suggested. We use gold as the alternative and as an inflation hedge. In this paper we ask: how much improvement over these benchmark fixed-weight portfolios can be obtained using widely available public data and standard methods from quantitative finance? We restrict ourselves to long-only dynamic portfolios of stocks, bonds, and gold, plus cash, rebalancing monthly, using only publicly available data. We evaluate portfolios on the conventional metrics: return, volatility, Sharpe ratio (computed in excess of the federal funds rate), drawdown, and turnover, in addition to consistency of performance over time, judged by the consistency of the realized annual volatility. Over the 20–year period 2006–2026, using a conservative estimate of trading costs, we show that all risk-adjusted and drawdown metrics are improved using simple volatility control, where we dynamically mix the fixed-weight portfolios with cash so as to target a fixed volatility. This method relies on a simple estimate of portfolio volatility derived from past returns. We also demonstrate that more sophisticated portfolios based on convex optimization—similar to those used in quantitative hedge funds—yield further substantial improvement in return and risk-adjusted return. We consider two such portfolios, one that uses a simple estimate of future returns based on past returns, and one that forecasts future returns based on past returns and just a handful of widely available public economic data. These portfolios also outperform a suite of standard risk-based allocation methods, such as risk parity and minimum variance, evaluated on the same assets and data.

Artificial intelligence (AI) now supports investment workflows from data and prediction through research, portfolios, execution, and tool use. Technical capability, however, is not evidence of investment profitability. This critical state-of-the-art review examines public research available through 31 August 2026 on listed equities, exchange-traded funds, centralized crypto spot, perpetual futures, and on-chain markets. We organize evidence with an alpha-translation chain: point-in-time information must yield a stable signal, feasible positions, executable orders, and risk-adjusted returns after costs. Across machine learning, time-series foundation models, financial language models, reinforcement learning, and agents, the examined record shows real but mainly upstream progress in prediction, text processing, portfolio design, and workflow integration. Evidence is thinner for durable net performance. Temporal contamination, repeated selection, survivorship, weak benchmarks, implementation costs, venue mechanics, and capacity can break translation to net alpha. Strong historical results coexist with predictor decay, corrected look-ahead failures, mixed prospective evidence, and few audited live-capital records. Crypto adds informative state but requires separate treatment of spot, perpetual, and decentralized cash flows and execution. Within the public evidence examined here, no general AI architecture is shown to deliver persistent, cross-regime, capacity-aware net alpha. More credible claims require point-in-time data and models, decision-aligned objectives, joint portfolio–execution evaluation, controlled adaptation, prospective tests, and authority-matched governance. These conditions can improve evidence and implementation; they do not guarantee profit.

Transaction costs can make or break a trading strategy, particularly in relative-value trading of commodity and macro markets, where edges are a few basis points. Price impact is a central component of transaction cost. Price impact models usually include self-impact (a trade in a contract moves that contract's price) but omit two well-documented effects: cross-impact (a trade in one contract also moves the prices of related contracts) and transient impact (price impact decays over time, so an unwind recovers part of the entry cost). A model without these effects overprices the impact of relative-value trades, whose correlated legs are built and unwound over days, and so forgoes potentially profitable trades. This paper models both effects with a convex quadratic cost. In each period, a positive semidefinite matrix built from volatility, volume, and correlation forecasts couples trades across contracts. A power-law decay kernel then couples trades across periods. The resulting cost admits no price manipulation even when liquidity varies over the planning horizon. The model is demonstrated empirically on calendar spread trading of crude oil futures around the commodity index roll.

Modern portfolio theory identifies diversification as the primary tool for risk reduction. However, under model uncertainty, this cornerstone may no longer remain optimal. This paper investigates the tension between portfolio diversification and concentration under dependence uncertainty. In the absence of model uncertainty, we employ the framework of the majorization order and doubly stochastic matrices to formalize the degree of diversification, and prove that quasi-convexity is a necessary and sufficient property for a risk functional to be weakly consistent with the majorization order. We further derive worst-case risk measure inequalities and solve robust portfolio selection problems for a broad class of risk measures, including VaR, ES, Range-VaR (RVaR), and standard deviation (SD). Our results reveal a ”concentration paradox” for many widely-used risk functionals: when the dependence structure is fully ambiguous, robust optimization often recommends concentrating investment in a single asset to hedge against the worst-case dependence scenario. As an application, we propose a weighted robustness formulation that interpolates between a reference dependence structure and the worst-case structure. The formulation is structurally analogous to the constrained/unconstrained Expected Shortfall blend in the Fundamental Review of the Trading Book (FRTB) and provides a theoretical foundation for balancing diversification against robustness in the presence of model uncertainty.

Robust portfolio rules that reconstruct confidence sets after learning need not preserve the evaluator obtained by prior-by-prior Bayesian transport. In the Gaussian model, this discrepancy is summarized by natural-coordinate displacement: inherited transport preserves it whereas fresh reconstruction can replace it. We price evaluator replacement and trace the resulting optimized curvature through endogenous research. Optimized robust value represents protocol regret as a functional Bregman divergence, while a within-vintage rectangular Gaussian benchmark with constant absolute risk aversion (CARA) yields a stopped recalibration tax. In a versioned model-release economy, validated history propagates through a strictly causal network and a same-cycle share of current optimized marginal value feeds back into research supply. The capacity-constrained equilibrium reduces to a scalar equation with protocol-indexed gain \(\mathfrak g_I^P=\lambda\beta_{R,I}(W_R^P)''\). Purely causal validation cannot create a same-cycle unit mode; provenance changes criticality through optimized curvature. For a scalar primitive supplier-score shock \(z\) in direction \(h_I\) and financial outcome \(\mathcal O\), sensitivity factors as \(\omega_{\mathcal O,h,I}/(1-\mathfrak g_I^P)\). Conditional on a smooth equilibrium state and active cell, completion-time information sharply bounds this multiplier when all compatible timing laws are subcritical; no finite uniform bound exists when the timing set reaches the pole.

Portfolio replication, or the construction of a tradable basket of assets to match the risk-return profile of a target benchmark, is fundamentally an ill-posed inverse problem. When restricted to a subset of available assets, classical variance-minimizing models often yield unstable, over-leveraged portfolios highly vulnerable to market shocks. We propose a unified, two-stage methodology rooted in information theory to achieve robust portfolio replication. First, we model the constituent asset returns against target factors, estimating parameters within data-driven empirical bounds via an entropy minimization principle. Second, using the same entropic approach, we determine the optimal weight replication. In both cases we use an entropy function of the Fermi-Dirac type defined directly on sets of constraints of the inverse problem. We validate this Entropic Factor Model (EFM) against standard Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) across five numerical experiments, including standard equity tracking, multi-asset synthesis, and severe stress-test scenarios. Empirical results demonstrate that the EFM consistently outperforms OLS in terms of annualized turnover and net-of-fees returns. Crucially, during the COVID-19 market crash and under severe idiosyncratic data corruption, the entropic framework acts as a probabilistic “circuit breaker", defensively reducing capital allocation to compromised assets and providing a highly robust, risk-averse solution for generalized portfolio replication.

Large Language Models (LLMs) increasingly use user context such as memory, profiles, and role prompts to personalize their responses. This personalization can affect evidence-based judgment: the same evidence may lead to different conclusions under different user contexts. Finance provides a high-stakes setting to study this problem because decisions often depend on interpreting long and complex documents. We test this using 3,575 SEC filings across twelve LLMs. We compare persona-conditioned retrieval, neutral retrieval, and memory-framed context to separate the effect of evidence selection from the effect of interpretation. We find that most user-context spillover comes from how models interpret the same evidence under different roles, rather than from retrieving different evidence. We then test two simple mitigation strategies: expressing the same investor mindset as a user profile instead of an assistant role, and separating evidence-based and personalized outputs. Both reduce spillover, but neither removes it completely, and their effectiveness varies substantially across models.

Modern portfolio management increasingly demands a balance between traditional risk-adjusted returns and strict Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) mandates. Current Reinforcement Learning (RL) approaches typically optimize for a single ESG provider, neglecting the significant divergence in rating methodologies across the industry and the unintuitive nature of manually weighting conflicting objectives. This paper addresses these limitations by formulating ESG-aware portfolio optimization as a Multi-Objective Reinforcement Learning (MORL) problem that simultaneously incorporates ratings from three distinct ESG agencies. To bridge the gap between high-dimensional algorithmic trade-offs and human decision-making, we integrate a Preference Elicitation framework using Gaussian Processes. This system enables practitioners to infer their latent utility functions through intuitive pairwise comparisons of candidate portfolios based on their Sharpe ratios and aggregate ESG scores. We systematically evaluate our framework by employing Large Language Model (LLM) personas to simulate Portfolio Managers operating under varied regional contexts. Empirical results using historical market data reveal that regional backgrounds fundamentally shift the derived preference weights. For instance, European-based personas tend to prioritize ESG alignment over financial returns, while Texas-based personas favor risk-adjusted performance. This work offers a highly adaptable framework that successfully aligns multi-objective algorithmic trading with diverse, real-world human sustainability preferences.

This paper develops uniform inference and certified capacity decisions for an estimated financial stability boundary. Conditional risk, temporary cross-impact, and effective risk-bearing capacity are jointly estimated from dependent observations. Conventional pointwise inference is reliable at a separated simple spectral root but can fail near semisimple or defective collisions. Projecting a valid joint confidence region for the underlying inputs avoids this local approximation and yields a three-way regime decision with abstention and a one-sided capacity bound. A verified two-dimensional implementation keeps numerical error from creating a resolved sign. Structural simulations recover the predicted tradeoff between coverage and resolution, while observed-risk stresses distinguish statistical abstention from an insufficient computational budget. The financial conclusions remain conditional on the identification of cross-impact, the normalization of capacity, and stability of the inputs over the action horizon.

This paper develops a mechanism through which costly changes in the representations used for portfolio choice can contribute to persistent signed order flow. Heterogeneous switching thresholds and opportunity volatility generate heterogeneous residence times, and renewal aggregation maps their execution-weighted tail into the decay of aggregate flow covariance. Under common execution weights, the same tail determines the exponent of representation-spell durations, the order-flow memory exponent, and the horizon at which finite-market scaling must end. First-passage renewal analysis establishes these joint restrictions. Structural simulations recover them from realized paths, quantify the distortion created by mismatched weights, and show how finite cross sections shorten the usable inference horizon. The resulting empirical protocol converts an aggregate persistence fit into cross-dataset restrictions that can determine whether a duration-based kernel is suitable for a separate execution-cost model.

We study whether nuclear and energy-adjacent equity options exhibit a harvestable variance risk premium. Using CRSP and OptionMetrics data for 2000-2024, we construct a systematic cash-secured short-put strategy on a curated universe of nuclear-related firms. The strategy compares at-the-money put implied volatility with GARCH-based realized volatility forecasts, then evaluates unconditional and IV/RV-filtered put-writing portfolios. The results show positive average option premia, high win rates, and substantially lower volatility than an equal-weight stock benchmark, though performance is measured before transaction costs and with a fixed universe.

Small-cap-inclusive equity universes contain recently listed and intermittently traded securities, so enforcing a common look-back discards a substantial fraction of the available information. Pairwise-complete estimation preserves the longest overlap for each asset pair, but the resulting correlation matrix can be indefinite because its entries are computed on different samples. This prevents direct use in Markowitz optimization and falls outside the assumptions of standard random-matrix shrinkage. We adapt a rotation-invariant neural covariance estimator to this setting. The model computes mask-aware marginal moments and a pairwise correlation matrix proxy, processes its signed spectrum, and uses a bidirectional gated recurrent unit conditioned on factor-aligned effective sample lengths derived from the overlap matrix and eigenvector loadings. It maps all eigenvalues, including negative ones, to a positive inverse spectrum. The reconstructed covariance is positive definite and is trained end-to-end to minimize five-day realized global-minimum-variance risk. We evaluate 26 expanding-window models from 2000 to 2025 on up to 1,500 U.S. equities in a closing-auction simulator with point-in-time selection, commissions, financing, corporate actions, and market impact. Across the 26-year out-of-sample period, the neural estimator reduces annualized five-day volatility by approximately 20% and increases the Sharpe ratio by approximately 40% relative to the next-best covariance estimator. These improvements are consistent across realized risk, risk-adjusted performance, and drawdown control, remain after the modeled execution frictions, and are supported by a 99.9% Model Confidence Set that retains only the neural estimator.

We show that the key optimization results of the classical Markowitz portfolio selection theory, originally formulated for variance as the risk measure, remain available in explicit closed form under a broader class of strictly convex quadratic risk measures. The proposed framework replaces the covariance matrix with an arbitrary symmetric positive definite matrix and allows additional linear and constant terms, thereby containing various models arising in transaction cost optimization, benchmark relative optimization, covariance regularization, and factor models. Closed-form formulas are obtained for the efficient frontier, the global minimum risk portfolio, the maximum Sharpe ratio portfolio, the Capital Market Curve, the tangency portfolio, and the maximum utility portfolio. In contrast to the classical Markowitz model, the tangency portfolio does not coincide with the maximum Sharpe ratio portfolio, revealing a new geometric phenomenon. A numerical example confirms the derived formulas.

Systematic trading rests on one article of faith: that regularities found in the past persist. This paper does three things. First, it states that faith as five axioms, each a commonplace practitioners already accept: (A1) a decision may use only what was known when it was made; (A2) what looks like the market changing its rules is the market changing its unobserved state, the machinery being the same in every era; (A3) the future may replay stretches of the past, though not in history's proportions; (A4) states persist for a while; (A5) whatever predictability exists is slight, even for a rule that knows the state. What turns these into axioms is quantification, and the quantities are declared rather than estimated: an invariance defect $\varepsilon_0$, a recurrence bound $\Lambda$ at a block scale $b$ (one declaration in two parts), coherence times $\ell_i$, a signal ceiling $\rho$ and an invariance ratio $\kappa$. These five declarations are the whole of the premises' empirical content. Second, it proves that the axioms force a five-stage canonical form for a quantitative investment system – a declared representation, a predictor within a capacity ceiling, contiguous purged block evaluation aggregated by $\mathrm{CVaR}_{1/\Lambda}$, a budgeted and deflated search, robust sizing at a fraction of the estimate that the budget bounds – each stage necessary: a procedure omitting it does strictly worse under a law the axioms admit. Third, it tests the axioms where they are falsifiable, each only at its declared constants, on real market series: no axiom is so far overturned.

KellyBoost is a single multi-output XGBoost model whose softmax output is the portfolio: with y the vector of per-asset holding-period returns, the training loss is - log(1 + w y), the negative log growth rate, so the fitted model is the growth-optimal (Kelly) allocation conditioned on the features. The objective is exact rather than a surrogate: we derive the gradient, the analytic diagonal Hessian and the full Hessian in closed form, verify them by finite differences, and ship a dependency-free reference engine.

We study continuous-time dynamic portfolio optimization under a Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) constraint on the investor's terminal loss. For a general class of convex trading objectives, we exploit the auxiliary-threshold representation of CVaR to establish the existence of an optimal strategy and strong duality without requiring market completeness. These results motivate a dual-based nested bisection–golden-search algorithm over the threshold and Lagrangian multiplier, where the inner iterations reduce to standard unconstrained stochastic control problems. We prove that the resulting strategies converge to the optimal control as the number of iterations tends to infinity. Numerical experiments recover the Merton policy when the risk constraint is nonbinding. When the constraint is binding, the optimal strategy becomes state dependent: the investor reduces risky exposure following adverse outcomes but preserves, and near maturity may increase, exposure following favorable outcomes. Thus, a terminal CVaR constraint produces an asymmetric reallocation across states rather than uniform de-risking. Nontraded endowment risk amplifies the conservative adjustment, whereas price impact lowers desired positions and adjustment speeds.

Asset-pricing models typically condition on a fixed information set. This paper endogenises the market's conditioning architecture by allowing portfolios to choose representations whose induced exposures affect prices. Capital allocated across representations determines aggregate positions and the clearing premium, while price feedback changes representation value and, through causal certification, admissible representations. A representation equilibrium is the fixed point of this configuration–price–certification loop. The framework separates position crowding through market impact from representation crowding generated by driver-space overlap and priced through a basis-invariant information-capacity cost. Under compactness, resolvent regularity and continuous certification, equilibrium exists at every switching cost; within a stable certification cell, informational congestion yields a concave population game and local uniqueness under a small-gain condition. At a settled configuration, a spectral statistic combining cross-impact, covariance and deployed capacity determines three position-path regimes: below one half the fundamental solution is unique; at the boundary only innovation-free deviations remain; above it, destabilising directions support a continuum of self-confirming conventions. Monotone impact lies inside the uniqueness region, while indefinite impact alone is not sufficient for multiplicity. Intermediary hedging can generate an indefinite response while round trips remain costly. Endogenous risk capacity bounds convention amplitudes, and least-squares learning makes the dominant convention neutral rather than attracting. The threshold is not estimated in data; instead, the empirical exercise documents an out-of-sample, driver-specific signature consistent with representation crowding and states the conditions required for direct measurement.

We develop parametric Entropic Value-at-Risk (EVaR) portfolio optimization for tempered stable Lévy returns. We derive portfolio cumulant-generating functions and weight-dependent admissible moment-generating-function domains under two multivariate constructions: a multivariate normal tempered stable approach and an independent component factorization. These expressions allow portfolio EVaR to be evaluated from fitted asset- or component-level parameters without repeated portfolio-level distribution fitting. We construct minimum-EVaR portfolios and two entropic reward–risk portfolios. We test the portfolios in a rolling 2000 to 2026 out-of-sample U.S. sector ETF allocation. In this universe, several entropic portfolios have higher realized Sharpe ratios than their matched CVaR portfolios or standard allocation benchmarks.

We develop simulation-based policy iteration for continuous-time portfolio choice with predictable returns and convex constraints. Each outer step re-evaluates a fixed-latent open-loop backpropagation-through-time (OL-BPTT) adjoint after deployment and solves the constrained update. Shifted-adjoint cancellation controls the adjoint–HJB Hamiltonian-gradient discrepancy by the policy-improvement residual. For CRRA portfolios, exact HJB policy iteration identifies the optimal reduced value factor, while population OL-BPTT iteration converges globally when the adjoint update is directionally improving and approximate stationarity is asymptotically HJB-compatible. A theorem-matched occupation audit yields maximal $95\%$ upper endpoints of $0.066$ for the primitive directional ratio and $0.074$ for a stronger norm-relative ratio, both against the half-step threshold $0.75$. In the high-precision $50$–$50$ occupancy/broad-anchor design of a three-factor, fifty-asset benchmark, current-policy re-evaluation outperforms matched pooled refinement under the on-policy and broad evaluation laws.