1 / 28

Estimating Value at Risk via Markov Switching ARCH models

Estimating Value at Risk via Markov Switching ARCH models. An Empirical Study on Stock Index Returns. Value at Risk (hereafter, VaR) is at the center of the recent interest in the risk management field. Bank for International Settlements (BIS)

Download Presentation

Estimating Value at Risk via Markov Switching ARCH models

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Estimating Value at Risk via Markov Switching ARCH models An Empirical Study on Stock Index Returns

  2. Value at Risk (hereafter, VaR) is at the center of the recent interest in the risk management field.

  3. Bank for International Settlements (BIS) • The measure of the banks’ capital adequacy ratios. • The measure of default risk, credit risk, operation risks and liquidity risk

  4. Relative VaR Absolute VaR VARα 0 μ The Definition of VaR VaR for a Confidence Interval of 99% The figure presents the definition for the VaR. VaR concept focuses on point VaRα, or the left-tailed maximum loss with confidence interval 1-α

  5. The Keys of Estimating VaR • Non-normality Properties: • Skewness • Kurtosis, • Tail-fatness

  6. The Solutions for Non-Normality • Non-Parametric Setting • Historical Simulation • Student t Setting • Stochastic Volatility Setting

  7. Why We Propose Stochastic Volatility? • The Shortcomings of Non-Parametric Setting Historical Simulation • Are the data used to simulate the underlying distribution representative? • The Shortcomings of Student t Setting • Can not picture the Skewness for the Return Distributions

  8. -----Distribution 1: A high Volatility Distribution x11,x12,x13,x14,.. _____Distribution 2: A Low Volatility Distribution x21 x22 x23 … x21 x22 x23 ---- Distribution 1 ___ Distribution 2 x11,x12, .……………… x13,x14

  9. Normal +Normal=Normal? • Normal +Normal=Normal • But, state-varying framework is • some observations from Dist. 1 • other observations from Dist. 2 • How to decide the sample from distribution 1 or distribution 2? • Two mechanisms: threshold systems and Markov-switching models

  10. The Most Popular Stochastic Volatility Setting • The ARCH and GARCH models

  11. Why We Propose Hamilton and Susmel (1994)’s SWARCH Model? • The Structure Change During the Estimating Periods • The SWARCH Models Incorporate Markov Switching (MS) and ARCH models • Use the MS to Control the Structural Changes and Thus Mitigate the Returns Volatility High Persistence Problems in ARCH models.

  12. Model Specifications • Linear Models

  13. Model Specifications • ARCH and GARCH Models:

  14. Model Specifications • SWARCH Models

  15. Markov Chain Process • In a special two regimes setting, set st=1 for the regime with low return volatility and st=2 for the one with high return volatility. • The transition probabilities can be presented as:

  16. VaR Estimate by SWARCH

  17. Empirical Analyses • Data: • Dow Jones, Nikkei, FCI and FTSE index returns. • Sample period is between January 7, 1980 and February 26, 1999 • Models: • ARCH, GARCH and SWARCH to control non-normality properties

  18. Empirical Analyses • 1,000-day windows in the rolling estimation process. • The research design begins with our collecting the 1,000 pre-VaR daily returns, , for each date t.

  19. Empirical Analyses • 4,838 trading days during the sample period • For our tests with 1,000 prior-trading-day estimation window and one-day as the order of the lagged term, we have 3,837 out-sample observations of violation rates. • If the VaR estimate is accurate, the violation rate should be 1%, or the violation number should be approximately equal to 38

  20. Empirical Analyses

  21. Empirical Analyses

  22. Empirical Analyses

  23. Empirical Analyses

  24. Empirical Analyses

  25. Empirical Analyses

More Related