  The field of portfolio selection is an active research topic, which combines
elements and methodologies from various fields, such as optimization, decision
analysis, risk management, data science, forecasting, etc. The modeling and
treatment of deep uncertainties for future asset returns is a major issue for
the success of analytical portfolio selection models. Recently, robust
optimization (RO) models have attracted a lot of interest in this area. RO
provides a computationally tractable framework for portfolio optimization based
on relatively general assumptions on the probability distributions of the
uncertain risk parameters. Thus, RO extends the framework of traditional linear
and non-linear models (e.g., the well-known mean-variance model), incorporating
uncertainty through a formal and analytical approach into the modeling process.
Robust counterparts of existing models can be considered as worst-case
re-formulations as far as deviations of the uncertain parameters from their
nominal values are concerned. Although several RO models have been proposed in
the literature focusing on various risk measures and different types of
uncertainty sets about asset returns, analytical empirical assessments of their
performance have not been performed in a comprehensive manner. The objective of
this study is to fill in this gap in the literature. More specifically, we
consider different types of RO models based on popular risk measures and
conduct an extensive comparative analysis of their performance using data from
the US market during the period 2005-2016.
