SavedAdd your journal

Journals / BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi / 2009 / Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 2

Alternative aproaches for estimating value at risk

Riske maruz değer hesaplamasında alternatif yaklaşımlar

MERT URAL
Pages
63–86
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The backtesting procedures examining the performance of the alternative VaR models appointed that the estimations under Cornish-Fisher expansion are more consistent for the financial asset returns frequently possessing fat tails and asymmetric distribution.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this paper the alternative value-at-risk (VaR) and expected shortfall (ES) analysis were made according to different error distribution assumptions by using stock market daily return series of Turkey (ISE100), United Kingdom (FTSE100), Japan (NIKKEI225) and France(CAC40).
📊
Key Findings & Data:In this paper the alternative value-at-risk (VaR) and expected shortfall (ES) analysis were made according to different error distribution assumptions by using stock market daily return series of Turkey (ISE100), United Kingdom (FTSE100), Japan (NIKKEI225) and France(CAC40).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The backtesting procedures examining the performance of the alternative VaR models appointed that the estimations under Cornish-Fisher expansion are more consistent for the financial asset returns frequently possessing fat tails and asymmetric distribution.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:risk · risk

Abstract

In this paper the alternative value-at-risk (VaR) and expected shortfall (ES) analysis were made according to different error distribution assumptions by using stock market daily return series of Turkey (ISE100), United Kingdom (FTSE100), Japan (NIKKEI225) and France(CAC40). The backtesting procedures examining the performance of the alternative VaR models appointed that the estimations under Cornish-Fisher expansion are more consistent for the financial asset returns frequently possessing fat tails and asymmetric distribution.

Özet

Bu çalışmada, İMKB100 (Türkiye), FTSE100 (İngiltere), NIKKEI225 (Japonya) ve CAC40 (Fransa) borsa endekslerine ait günlük getiri serileri kullanılarak farklı hata dağılımları için alternatifriske maruz değer (VaR) ve beklenen kayıp (ES) analizleri yapılmıştır. Alternatif VaR modellerinin başarısını belirlemek üzere gerçekleştirilen geriye dönük test sonuçlarına göre, çoğunlukla şişman kuyruk ve asimetrik yapıya sahip finansal varlık getirileri için Cornish-Fisher yaklaşımına dayalı hesaplamaların daha tutarlı sonuçlar verdiği anlaşılmıştır.

Keywords
🔖

Cite This Article

URAL, M. (2009). Alternative aproaches for estimating value at risk. BDDK Bankacılık ve Finansal Piyasalar Dergisi, Cilt: 3 - Sayı: 2, 63–86. https://ajindex.com/articles/148105

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Acerbi, C. ve Tasche, D. (2002). On The Coherence of Expected Shortfall, Journal of Banking and Finance. 26: 1487–1503
  2. Ané, T. (2006). An Analysis of the Şexibility of Asymmetric Power GARCH Models, Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, 51: 1293-1311
  3. Artzner, P., Delbaen, F., Eber, J-M. ve Heath, D. (1999). Coherent Measures of Risk, Mathematical Finance. 9: 203-228
  4. Bali, T.G., Gökcan, S. ve Liang, B. (2007). Value at Risk and the Cross-section of Hedge Fund Returns. Journal of Banking and Finance. 31: 1135-1166
  5. Baltagi, B.H. (2000). Econometrics. 4th Edition. USA: Springer Press
  6. Bank for International Settlements. (2000). Stress Testing By Large Financial Institutions: Current Practice And Aggregation Issues. Bank for International Settlements. Committee On The Global Financial System. CGFS-14
  7. Basak, S. ve Shapiro, A. (2001). Value-at-Risk Based Risk Management: Optimal Policies and Asset Prices, Review of Financial Studies. 14: 371-405
  8. Berkowitz, J. (2001). Testing Density Forecasts With Applications to Risk Management.Journal of Business and Economic Statistics. 19: 465-474
  9. Bolgün, K.E. ve Akçay M.B. (2005). Risk Yönetimi-Gelişmekte Olan Türk Finans Piyasasında Entegre Risk Ölçüm ve Yönetim Uygulamaları. İstanbul: Scala Yayıncılık
  10. Bollersev, T. (1986). Generalized Autoregressive Conditional Heteroscedasticity. Journal of Econometrics. 32: 307-327
  11. Bollersev, T., Engle, R.F. ve Nelson, D.B. (1994). ARCH Models. (Ed.: Robert F.Engle ve Daniel L. McFadden). Handbook of Econometrics. Amsterdam: North Holland Pres. 2959-3038
  12. Bozkuş, S. (2005). Risk Ölçümünde Alternatif Yaklaşımlar: Riske Maruz Değer (VaR) ve Beklenen Kayıp (ES) Uygulamaları. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi, İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. 20(2): 27-45
  13. Campbell, R., Huisman, R. ve Koedijk, K. (2001). Optimal Portfolio Selection ina Value at Risk Framework. Journal of Banking and Finance. 25: 1789–1804
  14. Christoffersen, P.F. (1998). Evaluating Interval Forecasts, International Economic Review, 39: 841-862
  15. Cornish, E.A. ve Fisher, R.A. (1937). Moments and Cumulants in the Specification of Distributions. Revue de l'Institut International de Statistique. 5(4): 307-320
  16. Çifter, A. (2004). Risk Yönetimi’nde (Skewed) Student-t ve GED Dağılımları ile Asimetrik ve (Kısmi) Entegre GARCH Modelleri: Eurobond Üzerine Bir Uygulama. VIII. Ulusal Finans Sempozyumu. İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi
  17. Çifter, A., Özün,