Abstract
This paper explores the effectiveness of the Non-dominated Sorting Genetic Algorithm III (NSGA-III) and traditional Mean-Variance optimization in financial portfolio management. Using a dataset comprising global financial assets, we applied both methodologies to optimize portfolios based on multiple objectives, including risk, return, skewness, and kurtosis. The findings reveal that NSGA-III outperforms the Mean-Variance method in achieving a more diverse set of Pareto-optimal portfolios. NSGA-III portfolios exhibited superior performance in balancing risk and return, demonstrated by higher Sharpe ratios, more favorable skewness, and lower kurtosis. Additionally, NSGA-III's ability to simultaneously optimize across multiple conflicting objectives highlights its robustness in navigating complex financial landscapes, offering enhanced portfolio resilience. In contrast, the Mean-Variance approach, while effective in achieving balanced risk and return, was limited in addressing higher-order moments of the return distribution. These results underscore NSGA-III's potential as a powerful tool for portfolio optimization, providing a comprehensive alternative to traditional methods in modern financial markets where multiple objectives must be considered.