An important issue in the financial literature concerns the conflict between the stochastic dominance (SD) and the mean-variance (EV) methods of choosing optimal portfolios of risky assets. Much of the recent theoretical and empirical work in portfolio analysis has been devoted to the extension and testing of the Markowitz two-moment model, in which it is assumed that either (a) decision makers have quadratic utility functions with negative second derivatives or (b) the probability functions are from some appropriate two-parameter family and the investor is risk averse.

The weighted average cost of capital (Ko) is presented in virtually all textbooks in financial management and capital budgeting as a practical concept fundamental to the actual selection of optimal financial and investment alternatives. As often employed Ko can be defined aswhereKo = the weighted average cost of capital, Ks = the cost of equity capital, Kb = the cost of debt capital, S = the market value of the firm's equity, B = the market value of the firm's debt, andV = S + B, the total market value of the firm.

R. Burr Porter, Roger C. Pfaffenberger, Efficient Algorithms for Conducting Stochastic Dominance Tests on Large Numbers of Portfolios: Reply, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 10, No. 1 (Mar., 1975), pp. 181-185

R. Burr Porter, Roger P. Bey, David C. Lewis, The Development of a Mean-Semivariance Approach to Capital Budgeting, The Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Vol. 10, No. 4, 1975 Proceedings (Nov., 1975), pp. 639-649

Recent theoretical and empirical work in portfolio theory has exhibited a natural evolution from the two-moment EV model popularized by Markowitz through the higher moment models to selection on the basis of the entire probability function. This latter approach, referred to as the Stochastic Dominance (SD) approach to portfolio selection, has been shown to be theoretically superior to all of the “moment methods” and has been the focus of an increasing volume of empirical work.

Previous empirical studies of mutual fund performance relative to market performance were conducted using two- and three-moment analysis. This study has applied first-, second-, and third-degree stochastic dominance principles to investigate the same question. Our results support the earlier Sharpe study and oppose the recent Arditti work. From the investor's standpoint, mutual fund performance was inferior to market performance over the period 1954–1963.