Total views : 353

A Computationally more Efficient Distance based VaR Methodology for Real Time Market Risk Measurement

Affiliations

  • Department of Electronics and Computer Engineering, KL University, Vaddeswaram - 522502, Andhra Pradesh, India
  • Jawaharlal Nehru Technological University, Kakinada – 533003, Andhra Pradesh, India

Abstract


Measurement of market risk requires lots of computational resources when the Value-at-Risk (VaR) is computed using the historical simulation approach as it involves full revaluation of the portfolio for the considered data points. Although approximations can be done using the delta-normal, delta-gamma and delta-gamma-theta approaches, historical simulation approach alone is straight forward method that uses past data to generate future values without assuming any distribution for the underlying returns. The requirement of intensive computational effort in case of historical simulation hinders it’s usage for applying to real time VaR calculation. In this work we propose a methodology that doesn’t forego the benefits of historical simulation approach but can be applied to calculate market risk VaR in real time. The VaR calculated using the proposed methodology converges as the range of the portfolio returns is increased. The proposed methodology is also superior to the historical simulation approach in terms of usage of the computational resources and applicability to real time without sacrificing accuracy obtained using historical simulation approach.


Keywords

Portfolio Assessment, Risk Assessment, Risk Assessment through Simulation, Share Market, Value-at-Risk.

Full Text:

 |  (PDF views: 207)

References


  • Danielsson J, de Vries CG. Value-at-Risk and extreme returns. Annales D’economie et de Statistque. 2000; 60:239–70.
  • Dowd K. Beyond Value-at-Risk - The new science of risk management. England: JohnWiley and Sons; 1998.
  • Fan Y, Wei YM, Xu WX. Application of VaR methodology to risk management in the stock market in China. Computers and Industrial Engineering. 2004 Apr; 46(2):383–8. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2003.12.018
  • Galdi FC, Pereira LM. Value-at-Risk (VaR) using volatility forecasting models: EWMA, GARCH and stochastic volatility. Brazilian Business Review. 2007 Apr; 4(1):74–94.
  • Giot P, Laurent S. Market risk in commodity markets: A VaR approach. Energy Econ. 2003 Sep; 25(5):435–57. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-9883(03)00052-5
  • Halton GA. History of Value-at-Risk: 1922-1998. Working Paper; 2002.
  • Haas M. New Methods in Backtesting. Financial Engineering. Bonn: Research Center Caesar; 2001. p. 1–20.
  • Jorion P. Value-at-Risk. The New Benchmark for Managing Financial Risk. 2nd ed. McGraw Hill; 2000.
  • Kupiec PH. Techniques for verifying the accuracy of risk measurement models. The Journal of Derivatives. 1995; 3(2):73–84. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.3905/jod.1995.407942
  • Leavens DH. Diversification of investments. Trusts and Estates. 1945; 80(5):469–73.
  • Markowitz HM. Portfolio Selection. Journal of Finance. 1952; 7(1):77–91. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2975974
  • Pafka S, Kondor I. Evaluating the risk metrics methodology in measuring volatility and Value-at-Risk in financial markets. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications.2001; 299(1-2):305–10. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4371(01)00310-7
  • Patev P, Kanaryan N, Lyroudi K. Modeling and forecasting the volatility of thin emerging stock markets: The case of Bulgaria. Comparative Economic Research. 2004 Jan; 12(4):47–60. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2478/v10103-009-0021-8
  • Sharpe WF. A simplified model for portfolio analysis. Management Science. 1963; 9(2):277–93. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.9.2.277
  • Sharpe WF. Capital asset prices: A theory of market equilibrium under conditions of risk. Journal of Finance. 1964 Sep; 19(3):425–42. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2977928
  • So MKP, Yo PLH. Empirical analysis of Garch models in Value-at-Risk estimation. Journal of International Financial Markets Institutions and Money. 2006 Apr; 16(2):180–97. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.intfin.2005.02.001
  • Tobin J. Liquidity preference as behaviour towards risk. The Review of Economic Studies. 1958; 25(2):65–86. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2296205
  • Tse YK. Stock returns volatility in the Tokyo Stock Exchange. Japan and the World Economy. 1991 Nov; 3(3):285–98. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0922-1425(91)90011-Z
  • Tse YK, Tung SH. Forecasting volatility in the Singapore Stock Market. Asia Pacific Journal of Management. 1992 Apr; 9(1):1–13. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10. 10.1007/BF01732034
  • Van den Goorbergh RWJ, Vlaar PJG. Value-at-Risk analysis of stock returns. Historical simulation, tail index estimation? De Nederlandse Bank-Staff Report; 1999 Mar. p. 1–39.
  • Vlaar PJG. Capital requirements and competition in the banking industry. WO&E no. 634. Netherlands Central Bank, Research Department; 2000.

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.