1,720,994 research outputs found
Market crashes and value-at-risk models
Many popular techniques for determining a securities firm's value-at-risk are based upon the calculation of the historical volatility of returns to the assets that comprise the portfolio and of the correlations between them. One such approach is the JP Morgan RiskMetrics methodology using Markowitz portfolio theory. An implicit assumption underlying this methodology is that the volatilities and correlations are constant throughout the sample period and, in particular, that they are not systematically related to one another. However, it has been suggested in a number of studies that the correlation between markets increases when the individual volatilities are high. This paper demonstrates that this type of relationship between correlation and volatility can lead to a downward bias in the estimated value-at-risk, and proposes a number of pragmatic approaches that risk managers might adopt for dealing with this issue
An extreme value approach to calculating the position risk requirements of financial futures contracts
Recommended from our members
A note on estimating market–based minimum capital risk requirements: a multivariate GARCH approach
Internal risk management models of the kind popularized by J. P. Morgan are now used widely by the world’s most sophisticated financial institutions as a means of measuring risk. Using the returns on three of the most popular futures contracts on the London International Financial Futures Exchange, in this paper we investigate the possibility of using multivariate generalized autoregressive conditional heteroscedasticity (GARCH) models for the calculation of minimum capital risk requirements (MCRRs). We propose a method for the estimation of the value at risk of a portfolio based on a multivariate GARCH model. We find that the consideration of the correlation between the contracts can lead to more accurate, and therefore more appropriate, MCRRs compared with the values obtained from a univariate approach to the problem
Recommended from our members
A word of caution on calculating market -based minimum capital risk requirements
This paper demonstrates that the use of GARCH-type models for the calculation of minimum capital risk requirements (MCRRs) may lead to the production of inaccurate and therefore inefficient capital requirements. We show that this inaccuracy stems from the fact that GARCH models typically overstate the degree of persistence in return volatility. A simple modification to the model is found to improve the accuracy of MCRR estimates in both back- and out-of-sample tests. Given that internal risk management models are currently in widespread usage in some parts of the world (most notably the USA), and will soon be permitted for EC banks and investment firms, we believe that our paper should serve as a valuable caution to risk management practitioners who are using, or intend to use this popular class of models
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
The present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Recommended from our members
A comparison of extreme value theory approaches for determining value at risk
This paper compares a number of different extreme value models for determining the value at risk (VaR) of three LIFFE futures contracts. A semi-nonparametric approach is also proposed, where the tail events are modeled using the generalised Pareto distribution, and normal market conditions are captured by the empirical distribution function. The value at risk estimates from this approach are compared with those of standard nonparametric extreme value tail estimation approaches, with a small sample bias-corrected extreme value approach, and with those calculated from bootstrapping the unconditional density and bootstrapping from a GARCH(1,1) model. The results indicate that, for a holdout sample, the proposed semi-nonparametric extreme value approach yields superior results to other methods, but the small sample tail index technique is also accurate
- …
