Journal of the Korean Data and Information Science Society

The Korean Data and Information Science Society (한국데이터정보과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

CTE with weighted portfolios

가중 포트폴리오에서의 CTE

  • Received : 2016.12.08
  • Accepted : 2017.01.18
  • Published : 2017.01.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In many literatures on VaR and CTE for multivariate distribution, these are estimated by using transformed univariate distribution with a specific ratio of many kinds of portfolios. Even though there are lots of works to define quantiles for multivariate distributions, there does not exist a quantile uniquely. Hence, it is not easy to define the VaR and CTE. In this paper, we propose the weighted CTE vectors corresponding to various ratio combinations of many kinds of portfolios by extending the researches on the alternative VaR and integrated multivariate CTE based on multivariate quantiles. We extend relation equations about univariate CTEs to multivariate CTE vectors and discuss their characteristics. The proposed weighted CTEs are explored with some data from multivariate normal distribution and illustrative examples.

다변량 분포에서의 VaR (Value at Risk)와 CTE (Conditional Tail Expectation)에 관한 많은 연구문헌에서는 특정한 포트폴리오 구성비를 이용하여 일변량 분포로 변환하여 추정하였다. 다변량 분포에서 분위수에 관한 많은 연구가 존재한다. 그러나 분위수가 유일하게 존재하지 않으므로, VaR와 CTE의 추정에 어려움이 있다. 본 연구에서는 다변량 분위 벡터를 이용한 대안적인 VaR와 통합적인 다변량 CTE의 연구를 확장하여, 여러 종류의 포트폴리오로 구성된 다양한 비율 조합에 따른 가중 CTE 벡터들을 제안한다. 일변량에 대한 CTE 관계식을 다차원의 관계식으로 확장하고, 일변량의 관계식과의 특징과 차이점에 대하여 토론한다. 정규분포로부터 추출한 자료와 실증 예제를 통하여 본 연구에서 제안한 가중 CTE를 탐색하면서 가중 CTE의 활용성과 장점을 유도한다.

Keywords

References

  1. Acerbi, C. and Tasche, D. (2002). Expected shortfall: A natural coherent alternative to VaR. Economic notes, 31, 379-388. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0300.00091
  2. Andersson, F., Mausser, H., Rosen, D. and Uryasev, S. (2001). Credit risk optimization with conditional value-at-risk. Mathatical Programming B, 89, 273-291. https://doi.org/10.1007/PL00011399
  3. Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J. M. and Heath, D. (1999). Coherent measures of risk. Mathematical Finance, 9, 203-228. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9965.00068
  4. Barone-Adesi, G., Giannopoulos, K. and Vosper, L. (1999). VaR without correlations for portfolios of derivative securities. Journal of Futures Markets, 19, 583-602. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-9934(199908)19:5<583::AID-FUT5>3.0.CO;2-S
  5. Berkowitz, J., Christoffersen, P. and Pelletier, D. (2011). Evaluating value-at-risk models with desk-level data. Managent Science, 57, 2213-2227. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1080.0964
  6. Chen, L. A. and Welsh, A. H. (2002). Distribution function based bivariate quantiles. Journal of Multivariate Analysis, 24, 523-533.
  7. Hong, C. S. and Kim, T. W. (2016). Multivariate conditional tail expectations. Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 29, To appear.
  8. Hong, C. S., Han, S. J. and Lee, G. P. (2016). Vector at risk and alternative value at risk. The Korean Journal of Applied Statistics, 29, 689-697. https://doi.org/10.5351/KJAS.2016.29.4.689
  9. Hong, C. S. and Kwon, T. W. (2010). Distribution fitting for the rate of return and value at risk. Journal of the Korean Data & Information Science Society, 21, 219-229.
  10. Jorion, P. (1997). Value at risk: the new benchmark for controlling market risk, Irwin Professional Pub, Chicago.
  11. Ko, K. Y. and Son, Y. S. (2015). Optimal portfolio and VaR of KOSPI200 using One-factor model. Journal of the Korean Data & Information Science Society, 26, 323-334. https://doi.org/10.7465/jkdi.2015.26.2.323
  12. Krokhmal, P., Palmquist, J. and Uryasev, S. (2002). Portfolio optimization with conditional Value-at-Risk objective and constraints. Journal of Risk, 4, 11-27.
  13. Kupiec, P. (1995). Techniques for verifying the accuracy of risk management models. Journal of Derivatives, 2, 73-84. https://doi.org/10.3905/jod.1995.407918
  14. Longin, F. M. (2000). From value at risk to stress testing: The extreme value approach. Journal of Banking & Finance, 24, 1097-1130. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4266(99)00077-1
  15. Longin, F. M. (2001). Beyond the VaR. Journal of Derivatives, 8, 36-48. https://doi.org/10.3905/jod.2001.319161
  16. Lopez, J. A. (1998). Methods for evaluating value-at-risk estimates. Economic Policy Review, 4, 119-124.
  17. Park, S. R. and Baek, C. R. (2014). On multivariate GARCH model selection based on risk management. Journal of the Korean Data & Information Science Society, 25, 1333-1343. https://doi.org/10.7465/jkdi.2014.25.6.1333
  18. Rockafellar, R. T. and Uryasev, S. (2000). Optimization of conditional value-at-risk. Journal of Risk, 2, 21-41. https://doi.org/10.21314/JOR.2000.038
  19. Rockafellar, R. T. and Uryasev, S. (2002). Conditional value-at-risk for general loss distributions. Journal of Banking & Finance, 26, 1443-1471. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0378-4266(02)00271-6
  20. Sarykalin, S., Serraino, G. and Uryasev, S. (2008). Value at risk vs. conditional value at risk in risk management and optimization. Tutorials in Operations Research, 270-294.
  21. Topaloglou, N., Vladimirou, H. and Zenios, S. A. (2002). Conditional VaR models with selective hedging for inernational asset allocation. Journal of Banking and Finance, 26, 1537-1563.
  22. Yuzhi, C. (2010). Multivariate quantile function models. Statistica Sinica, 20, 481-496.