In running various assets through portfolio-optimization software, I noticed that for an undiversified set of assets there can be wide differences between portfolios with the highest Sharpe ratios versus portfolios with the Sortino ratios. Further, if the efficient frontier of ten portfolios is constructed (based on mean-variance optimization) and sorted according to both Sharpe and Sortino ratios the ordering is very different.
If, however, the same analysis is performed on a globally-diversified set of assets the portfolios tend to converge. The broad ribbon of of the 3-D efficient surface seen with undiversfied assets narrows until it begins to resemble a string arching smoothly through space. The Sharpe/Sortino ordering becomes very similar with ranks seldom differing by more than 1 or 2 positions. Portfolios E and F may rank 2 and 3 in the Sharpe ranking but rank 2 and 1 in the Sortino ranking, for example.
Variance/Semivariance divergence is wider for optimized portfolios of individual stocks. When sector-based stock ETFs are used instead of individual stocks, the divergence narrows. When bond- and broad-based index ETFs are optimized, the divergence narrows to the point that it could be considered by many to be insignificant.
This simple convergence observation has interesting ramifications. First, a first-pass of faster variance optimization can be applied, followed by a slower semivariance-based refinement to more efficiently achieve a semivariance-optimized portfolio. Second, semivariance distinctions can be very significant for non-ETF (stock-picking) and less-diversified portfolios. Third, for globally-diversified, stock/bond, index-EFT-based portfolios, the differences between variance-optimized and semivariance-optimized portfolios are extremely subtle and minute.