scholarly journals Coherent Risk Measures and Convex Combinations of the Conditional Value at Risk (C V@R)

2016 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-75 ◽  
Author(s):  
Georg Ch. Pflug
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Coherent Risk Measures ◽  
Coherent Risk

The conditional-value-at-risk (C V@R) has been widely used as a risk measure. It is well known, that C V@R is coherent in the sense of Artzner, Delbaen, Eber, Heath (1999). The class of coherent risk measures is convex. It was conjectured, that all coherent risk measures can be represented as convex combinations of C V@R’s. In this note we show that this conjecture is wrong.

scholarly journals Estimation of the Portfolio Risk from Conditional Value at Risk Using Monte Carlo Simulation

2021 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 370-380
Author(s):  
Ervin Indarwati ◽  
Rosita Kusumawati
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Monte Carlo Simulation ◽  
Monte Carlo ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Risk Estimation ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Portfolio Risk ◽  
Portfolio Returns

Portfolio risk shows the large deviations in portfolio returns from expected portfolio returns. Value at Risk (VaR) is one method for determining the maximum risk of loss of a portfolio or an asset based on a certain probability and time. There are three methods to estimate VaR, namely variance-covariance, historical, and Monte Carlo simulations. One disadvantage of VaR is that it is incoherent because it does not have sub-additive properties. Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR) is a coherent or related risk measure and has a sub-additive nature which indicates that the loss on the portfolio is smaller or equal to the amount of loss of each asset. CVaR can provide loss information above the maximum loss. Estimating portfolio risk from the CVaR value using Monte Carlo simulation and its application to PT. Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero) Tbk (BBNI.JK) and PT. Bank Tabungan Negara (Persero) Tbk (BBTN.JK) will be discussed in this study.  The  daily  closing  price  of  each  BBNI  and BBTN share from 6 January 2019 to 30 December 2019 is used to measure the CVaR of the two banks' stock portfolios with this Monte Carlo simulation. The steps taken are determining the return value of assets, testing the normality of return of assets, looking for risk measures of returning assets that form a normally distributed portfolio, simulate the return of assets with monte carlo, calculate portfolio weights, looking for returns portfolio, calculate the quartile of portfolio return as a VaR value, and calculate the average loss above the VaR value as a CVaR value. The results of portfolio risk estimation of the value of CVaR using Monte Carlo simulation on PT. Bank Negara Indonesia (Persero) Tbk and PT. Bank Tabungan Negara (Persero) Tbk at a confidence level of 90%, 95%, and 99% is 5.82%, 6.39%, and 7.1% with a standard error of 0.58%, 0.59%, and 0.59%. If the initial funds that will be invested in this portfolio are illustrated at Rp 100,000,000, it can be interpreted that the maximum possible risk that investors will receive in the future will not exceed Rp 5,820,000, Rp 6,390,000 and Rp 7,100,000 at the significant level 90%, 95%, and 99%

Coherent Risk Measures

2014 ◽  
pp. 115-142
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Extreme Value Theory ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Value Theory ◽  
Extreme Value ◽  
Expected Shortfall ◽  
Coherent Risk Measures ◽  
Coherent Risk ◽  
Distortion Risk Measure

This chapter introduces some alternative risk measures to Vale-At-Risk (VaR) calculations: Extreme Value Theory (EVT), Expected Shortfall (ES) and distortion risk measure. It also discusses their more coherent characteristics useful for shoring up the weaknesses of VaR.

scholarly journals Backtesting Marginal Expected Shortfall and Related Systemic Risk Measures

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Denisa Banulescu-Radu ◽  
Christophe Hurlin ◽  
Jérémy Leymarie ◽  
Olivier Scaillet
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Financial Institutions ◽  
Systemic Risk ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Expected Shortfall ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Finite Sample ◽  
Marginal Expected Shortfall

This paper proposes an original approach for backtesting systemic risk measures. This backtesting approach makes it possible to assess the systemic risk measure forecasts used to identify the financial institutions that contribute the most to the overall risk in the financial system. Our procedure is based on simple tests similar to those generally used to backtest the standard market risk measures such as value-at-risk or expected shortfall. We introduce a concept of violation associated with the marginal expected shortfall (MES), and we define unconditional coverage and independence tests for these violations. We can generalize these tests to any MES-based systemic risk measures such as the systemic expected shortfall (SES), the systemic risk measure (SRISK), or the delta conditional value-at-risk ([Formula: see text]CoVaR). We study their asymptotic properties in the presence of estimation risk and investigate their finite sample performance via Monte Carlo simulations. An empirical application to a panel of U.S. financial institutions is conducted to assess the validity of MES, SRISK, and [Formula: see text]CoVaR forecasts issued from a bivariate GARCH model with a dynamic conditional correlation structure. Our results show that this model provides valid forecasts for MES and SRISK when considering a medium-term horizon. Finally, we propose an early warning system indicator for future systemic crises deduced from these backtests. Our indicator quantifies how much is the measurement error issued by a systemic risk forecast at a given point in time which can serve for the early detection of global market reversals. This paper was accepted by Kay Giesecke, finance.

scholarly journals On quantile based co-risk measures and their estimation

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 396-416
Author(s):  
Sebastian Fuchs ◽  
Wolfgang Trutschnig
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Regularity Conditions ◽  
Related Risk ◽  
Consistent Estimators ◽  
Strongly Consistent ◽  
Different Levels

AbstractConditional Value-at-Risk (CoVaR) is defined as the Value-at-Risk of a certain risk given that the related risk equals a given threshold (CoVaR=) or is smaller/larger than a given threshold (CoVaR</CoVaR≥). We extend the notion of Conditional Value-at-Risk to quantile based co-risk measures that are weighted mixtures of CoVaR at different levels and hence involve the stochastic dependence that occurs among the risks and that is captured by copulas. We show that every quantile based co-risk measure is a quantile based risk measure and hence fulfills all related properties. We further discuss continuity results of quantile based co-risk measures from which consistent estimators for CoVaR< and CoVaR≥ based risk measures immediately follow when plugging in empirical copulas. Although estimating co-risk measures based on CoVaR= is a nontrivial endeavour since conditioning on events with zero probability is necessary we show that working with so-called empirical checkerboard copulas allows to construct strongly consistent estimators for CoVaR= and related co-risk measures under very mild regularity conditions. A small simulation study illustrates the performance of the obtained estimators for special classes of copulas.

scholarly journals Multi-stage stochastic model in portfolio selection problem

Filomat ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (3) ◽  
pp. 991-1001
Author(s):  
Shokoofeh Banihashemi ◽  
Ali Azarpour ◽  
Marziye Kaveh
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Portfolio Selection ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Selection Problem ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Expected Return ◽  
Portfolio Selection Problem ◽  
Multi Stage

This paper is a novel work of portfolio-selection problem solving using multi objective model considering four parameters, Expected return, downside beta coefficient, semivariance and conditional value at risk at a specified confidence level. Multi-period models can be defined as stochastic models. Early studies on portfolio selection developed using variance as a risk measure; although, theories and practices revealed that variance, considering its downsides, is not a desirable risk measure. To increase accuracy and overcoming negative aspects of variance, downside risk measures like semivarinace, downside beta covariance, value at risk and conditional value at risk was other risk measures that replaced in models. These risk measures all have advantages over variance and previous works using these parameters have shown improvements in the best portfolio selection. Purposed models are solved using genetic algorithm and for the topic completion, numerical example and plots to measure the performance of model in four dimensions are provided.

scholarly journals Risk-Averse Approximate Dynamic Programming with Quantile-Based Risk Measures

2018 ◽  
Vol 43 (2) ◽  
pp. 554-579 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel R. Jiang ◽  
Warren B. Powell
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Dynamic Programming ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Approximate Dynamic Programming ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Theoretical Development ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Risk Averse ◽  
Sequential Decision

In this paper, we consider a finite-horizon Markov decision process (MDP) for which the objective at each stage is to minimize a quantile-based risk measure (QBRM) of the sequence of future costs; we call the overall objective a dynamic quantile-based risk measure (DQBRM). In particular, we consider optimizing dynamic risk measures where the one-step risk measures are QBRMs, a class of risk measures that includes the popular value at risk (VaR) and the conditional value at risk (CVaR). Although there is considerable theoretical development of risk-averse MDPs in the literature, the computational challenges have not been explored as thoroughly. We propose data-driven and simulation-based approximate dynamic programming (ADP) algorithms to solve the risk-averse sequential decision problem. We address the issue of inefficient sampling for risk applications in simulated settings and present a procedure, based on importance sampling, to direct samples toward the “risky region” as the ADP algorithm progresses. Finally, we show numerical results of our algorithms in the context of an application involving risk-averse bidding for energy storage. The online appendix is available at https://doi.org/10.1287/moor.2017.0872 .

scholarly journals Portfolio Optimization Constrained by Performance Attribution

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (5) ◽  
pp. 201
Author(s):  
Yuan Hu ◽  
W. Brent Lindquist ◽  
Svetlozar T. Rachev
Keyword(s):  
Portfolio Optimization ◽  
Asset Allocation ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Selection Effect ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Positive Role ◽  
Performance Attribution ◽  
Dow Jones Industrial Average

This paper investigates performance attribution measures as a basis for constraining portfolio optimization. We employ optimizations that minimize conditional value-at-risk and investigate two performance attributes, asset allocation (AA) and the selection effect (SE), as constraints on asset weights. The test portfolio consists of stocks from the Dow Jones Industrial Average index. Values for the performance attributes are established relative to two benchmarks, equi-weighted and price-weighted portfolios of the same stocks. Performance of the optimized portfolios is judged using comparisons of cumulative price and the risk-measures: maximum drawdown, Sharpe ratio, Sortino–Satchell ratio and Rachev ratio. The results suggest that achieving SE performance thresholds requires larger turnover values than that required for achieving comparable AA thresholds. The results also suggest a positive role in price and risk-measure performance for the imposition of constraints on AA and SE.

scholarly journals Return Based Risk Measures for Non-Normally Distributed Returns: An Alternative Modelling Approach

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (11) ◽  
pp. 540
Author(s):  
Eyden Samunderu ◽  
Yvonne T. Murahwa
Keyword(s):  
At Risk ◽  
Normal Distribution ◽  
Hedge Funds ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Financial Risk ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Extensive Literature ◽  
Data Set ◽  
Normally Distributed

Developments in the world of finance have led the authors to assess the adequacy of using the normal distribution assumptions alone in measuring risk. Cushioning against risk has always created a plethora of complexities and challenges; hence, this paper attempts to analyse statistical properties of various risk measures in a not normal distribution and provide a financial blueprint on how to manage risk. It is assumed that using old assumptions of normality alone in a distribution is not as accurate, which has led to the use of models that do not give accurate risk measures. Our empirical design of study firstly examined an overview of the use of returns in measuring risk and an assessment of the current financial environment. As an alternative to conventional measures, our paper employs a mosaic of risk techniques in order to ascertain the fact that there is no one universal risk measure. The next step involved looking at the current risk proxy measures adopted, such as the Gaussian-based, value at risk (VaR) measure. Furthermore, the authors analysed multiple alternative approaches that do not take into account the normality assumption, such as other variations of VaR, as well as econometric models that can be used in risk measurement and forecasting. Value at risk (VaR) is a widely used measure of financial risk, which provides a way of quantifying and managing the risk of a portfolio. Arguably, VaR represents the most important tool for evaluating market risk as one of the several threats to the global financial system. Upon carrying out an extensive literature review, a data set was applied which was composed of three main asset classes: bonds, equities and hedge funds. The first part was to determine to what extent returns are not normally distributed. After testing the hypothesis, it was found that the majority of returns are not normally distributed but instead exhibit skewness and kurtosis greater or less than three. The study then applied various VaR methods to measure risk in order to determine the most efficient ones. Different timelines were used to carry out stressed value at risks, and it was seen that during periods of crisis, the volatility of asset returns was higher. The other steps that followed examined the relationship of the variables, correlation tests and time series analysis conducted and led to the forecasting of the returns. It was noted that these methods could not be used in isolation. We adopted the use of a mosaic of all the methods from the VaR measures, which included studying the behaviour and relation of assets with each other. Furthermore, we also examined the environment as a whole, then applied forecasting models to accurately value returns; this gave a much more accurate and relevant risk measure as compared to the initial assumption of normality.

Risk Measures for Natural Resource Management: Description, Simulation Testing, and R Code With Fisheries Examples

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 150-157 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suresh Andrew Sethi ◽  
Mike Dalton
Keyword(s):  
Natural Resource ◽  
Value At Risk ◽  
Risk Measures ◽  
Risk Measure ◽  
Policy Decision ◽  
Performance Measure ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Conditional Value At Risk ◽  
Management Scenarios ◽  
Resource Systems

Abstract Traditional measures that quantify variation in natural resource systems include both upside and downside deviations as contributing to variability, such as standard deviation or the coefficient of variation. Here we introduce three risk measures from investment theory, which quantify variability in natural resource systems by analyzing either upside or downside outcomes and typical or extreme outcomes separately: semideviation, conditional value-at-risk, and probability of ruin. Risk measures can be custom tailored to frame variability as a performance measure in terms directly meaningful to specific management objectives, such as presenting risk as harvest expected in an extreme bad year, or by characterizing risk as the probability of fishery escapement falling below a prescribed threshold. In this paper, we present formulae, empirical examples from commercial fisheries, and R code to calculate three risk measures. In addition, we evaluated risk measure performance with simulated data, and we found that risk measures can provide unbiased estimates at small sample sizes. By decomposing complex variability into quantitative metrics, we envision risk measures to be useful across a range of wildlife management scenarios, including policy decision analyses, comparative analyses across systems, and tracking the state of natural resource systems through time.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document