Lu Cao. A Thesis in The Department of Mathematics and Statistics
|
|
- Mariah Sparks
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Multivariate Robust Vector-Valued Range Value-at-Risk Lu Cao A Thesis in The Department of Mathematics and Statistics Presented in Partial Fulllment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science (Mathematics) at Concordia University Montreal, Quebec, Canada August 2017 c Lu Cao, 2017
2 CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY School of Graduate Studies This is to certify that the thesis prepared By: Lu Cao Entitled: Multivariate Robust Vector-Valued Range Value-at-Risk and submitted in partial fulllment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science (Mathematics) complies with the regulations of the University and meets the accepted standards with respect to originality and quality. Signed by the nal Examining Committee: Dr. M. Mailhot Dr. F. Godin Dr. V. Bignozzi Thesis Supervisor Examiner Examiner Approved by 2017 Chair of Department or Graduate Program Director Dean of Faculty
3 iii Abstract Multivariate Robust Vector-Valued Range Value-at-Risk Lu Cao In a multivariate setting, the dependence between random variables has to be accounted for modeling purposes. Various of multivariate risk measures have been developed, including bivariate lower and upper orthant Value-at-Risk (VaR) and Tail Value-at-Risk (TVaR). The robustness of their estimators has to be discussed with the help of sensitivity functions, since risk measures are estimated from data. In this thesis, several univariate risk measures and their multivariate extensions are presented. In particular, we are interested in developing the bivariate version of a robust risk measure called Range Value-at-Risk (RVaR). Examples with dierent copulas, such as the Archimedean copula, are provided. Also, properties such as translation invariance, positive homogeneity and monotonicity are examined. Consistent empirical estimators are also presented along with the simulation. Moreover, the sensitivity functions of the bivariate VaR, TVaR and RVaR are obtained, which conrms the robustness of bivariate VaR and RVaR as expected.
4 iv Acknowledgments I would like to express my gratitude to all those who helped me during the writing of this thesis. First and foremost, I would like to thank Dr. Mélina Mailhot, my supervisor, for her constant encouragement and guidance. She has walked me through all the stages of the writing of this thesis. Without her consistent and illuminating instruction, this thesis could not have reached its present form. Sencond, special thanks should go to Prof. Valeria Bignozzi who put considerable time into the comments on this thesis. Also, I would like to express my gratitude to all the professors in the department. Last my thanks would go to my friends who have always been helping me out of diculties and supporting me.
5 CONTENTS List of Figures ix List of Tables ix 1. Introduction Univariate Risk Measures Preliminaries Denitions and Properties Robustness Numerical Examples Multivariate Risk Measures Copulas Bivariate VaR and TVaR Bivariate Lower Orthant RVaR Bivariate Upper Orthant RVaR Properties of Bivariate RVaR Empirical Estimators and Robustness of RVaR Empirical Estimator for Bivariate RVaR
6 Contents vi 4.2 Robustness of Multivariate Risk Measures Simulation Conclusion
7 LIST OF FIGURES 3.1 Gumbel and Frank Copulas with dependent parameters θ = 2 and θ = Clayton Copula with dependent parameters θ = Lower orthant VaR at level Upper orthant VaR at level Lower orthant VaR and TVaR at level Upper orthant VaR and TVaR at level Lower orthant VaR at level 0.95 and RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] for xed values of X Lower orthant VaR at level 0.95 and RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] for xed values of X Upper orthant VaR at level 0.99 and RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] for xed values of X Upper orthant VaR at level 0.99 and RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] for xed values of X Empirical estimator of the lower orthant VaR at level Empirical estimator of the upper orthant VaR at level Empirical estimator of the lower orthant RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] Empirical estimator of the upper orthant RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99].. 62
8 List of Figures viii 4.5 Empirical estimator of the lower orthant RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] with dependent parameters θ = 1.4, θ = 1.5 and θ = Empirical estimator of the upper orthant RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] with dependent parameters θ = 1.4, θ = 1.5 and θ =
9 LIST OF TABLES 2.1 Probability distribution of the discrete variable X RV arα1,α 2 (X) and ρ(x)
10 1. INTRODUCTION Volatility and risks of nancial markets have recently increased signicantly with the globalization of economy and nancial innovation. For companies, risk management is crucial to their success. Entities are interested in risk measures in order to allocate capital and maintain solvency. Dierent univariate risk measures have been proposed in the literature. Consider a random loss variable X on a probability space (Ω, F, P) with its cumulative distribution function (cdf) F X. The term Value-at-Risk (VaR) found its way through the G-30 report published in July 1993 see [14] for details. It is the loss in market value that can only be exceeded with a probability of at most 1 α where α often takes value 0.95 or However, Artzner et al. (1999) show that VaR is not a coherent risk measure and it does not provide any information about the tail of the distribution, suggesting two specic risk measures called Tail Conditional Expectation (TCE) and Worst Conditional Expectation (WCE). TCE evaluates the average value of VaR over all condence levels greater than α while WCE is the expected loss under the condition that the set of worst events occurs. An alternative risk measure called Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) is used to optimize portfolios by Rockafellar and Uryasev (2000). Another remedy for the deciencies of VaR is Expected Shortfall (ES) proposed by Acerbi and Tasche (2002). WCE is closely related to TCE, but in general does not coincide with it. For discrete random variables, the WCE could be greater than the TCE. WCE is only useful in a theoretical setting since it requires the knowledge of
11 1. Introduction 2 the whole underlying probability space while TCE is easy to compute but not coherent for discrete random variables. ES and CVaR are two dierent interpretations of the weighted average between the VaR and losses exceeding VaR. ES is more precise than CVaR and easier to compute, since it considers the eect of jump points. Specially, ES is continuous and monotonic with respect to the signicant level α. Although all these measures have been widely studied, univariate risk measures are not enough for current nancial markets since nancial risks are strongly interconnected and cannot only be managed individually or by aggregation. In reality, companies have to consider the dependence between risks so that they can get the accurate capital allocation, and systemic and global risk evaluation. Systemic risk refers to the risks imposed by interdependencies in a system. Univariate risk measures are unable to be used for heterogeneous classes of homogeneous risks. Therefore, multivariate risk measures have been developed in the last decade. An extension of the Worst Conditional Expectation (WCE) in Artzner et al. (1999) is called the Multivariate Worst Conditional Expectation (MWCE), which is proposed by Jouini et al. (2004). In the same framework, Bentahar (2006) introduces a quantile-based risk measure called vector-valued Tail Conditional Expectation (TCE). Furthermore, Tahar and Lépinette (2012, 2014) propose the Generalized Worst Conditional Expectation (GWCE). Embrechts and Puccetti (2006), Nappo and Spizzichino (2009) and Prékopa (2012) use the notion of quantile curves to dene a multivariate risk measure called upper and lower orthant VaR. Based on the same idea, Cossette et al. (2013) redene the upper and lower orthant VaR and propose the upper and lower orthant TVaR in Cossette et al. (2015). At the same time, Cousin and Di Bernardino (2013) develop a vectorized version of the upper and lower orthant VaR. Moreover, multivariate extensions of CTE and CoVaR are developed in Cousin and Di Bernardino (2014, 2015). CoVaR represents VaR for a nancial institution, conditional
12 1. Introduction 3 on the boundary of the α-level set, and measures a nancial institution's contribution to the system's risk. A drawback of multivariate VaR is that it represents the boundary of the α- level set and no information above is provided, similarly to the univariate VaR. Furthermore, relationships holding for univariate risk measures can be totally dierent in a multivariate setting. Thus, in this thesis, we will compare and summarize the relationships between these multivariate risk measures. Most risk measures are dened as functions of the loss distribution which should be estimated from data in applications. Cont et al. (2010) dene risk measurement procedure and analyze the robustness of dierent risk measures. They point out the conict between the subadditivity and robustness and propose a robust risk measure called weighted VaR (WVaR). Bignozzi and Tsanakas (2016) also suggest to use the truncated version of TVaR (or Range-Value-at-Risk (RVaR)) which is same as WVaR when the mean of the loss distribution is innite. We will develop the multivariate RVaR in this thesis, in order to provide a new robust multivariate risk measure.
13 2. UNIVARIATE RISK MEASURES 2.1 Preliminaries A risk measure ρ(x) for a univariate risk X corresponds to the required assets that have to be maintained such that the nancial position ρ(x) X is acceptable for regulators. Since there are several ways to dene risk measures, an appropriate choice becomes crucial for both regulators and entrepreneurs. Properties of coherent risk measures proposed by Artzner et al. (1999) can be signicant criteria. Denition For random variables X and Y, a risk measure ρ is a coherent risk measure if it satises the following four axioms, 1. (Translation invariance) For all c R, ρ(x + c) = ρ(x) + c. 2. (Positive homogeneity) If c 0, then ρ(cx) = cρ(x). 3. (Monotonicity) For X Y, then ρ(x) ρ(y ). 4. (Subadditivity) ρ(x + Y ) ρ(x) + ρ(y ). The interpretations of these axioms have been well documented in the literature (see, e.g., [2] for details). Translation invariance indicates that the addition of a certain amount of losses increases the risk measure by the same amount. Positive homogeneity indicates that
14 2. Univariate Risk Measures 5 the risk measure is proportional to the size of risk. For example, if we measure the losses in dierent currency units, the results will follow the same scale. Monotonicity indicates that the portfolio which always has higher losses should have a higher risk measure. Subadditivity indicates that the risk can be diversied by combining portfolios. Risk measures satisfying all these axioms are more reasonable and acceptable. Moreover, since risk measures are estimated from historical data in practice, the robustness of their estimators is a relevant question. Robust statistics can be dened as statistics that are not unduly aected by outliers. To clarify this denition, consider a sample generated from a log-normal distribution which is heavy-tailed. The occurrence of huge losses will signicantly shift up the sample average. Using sample average as the estimator of mean would lead to large mean squared error (MSE). Therefore, it is not a robust statistic. Now, consider a continuous random variable X with cdf F D where D is the convex set of cdfs. Notice that a risk measure is distribution-based if ρ(x 1 ) = ρ(x 2 ) when F X1 = F X2. Hence, we use ρ(f ) ρ(x) to represent the distribution-based risk measures. To quantify the sensitivity of a risk measure to the change in the distribution, the sensitivity function is used in this thesis. This method is used in Cont et al. (2010) and can be explained as the one-sided directional derivative of the eective risk measure at F in the direction δ z. Denition Consider ρ, a distribution-based risk measure of a continuous random variable X with distribution function F D. For ε [0, 1), set F ε = εδ z + (1 ε)f such that F ε D. δ z D is the probability measure which gives mass 1 to {z}. The distribution F ε is dierentiable at any x z and has a jump point at the point x = z. The sensitivity function is dened by ρ(f ε ) ρ(f ) S(z) = S(z; F ) lim, ε 0 + ε for any z R such that the limit exist.
15 2. Univariate Risk Measures 6 Furthermore, for a robust statistic, the value of sensitivity function will not go to innity when z becomes arbitrarily large. In other word, the bounded sensitivity function makes sure that the risk measure will not blow up when a small change happens. 2.2 Denitions and Properties Value-at-Risk (VaR) introduced in the G-30 report published in July 1993 provides the lower bound which covers the 100α% of the possible losses. In other words, it gives us the probable maximum loss under a given signicance level. Denition For a random variable X with cumulative distribution function (cdf) F X, the Value-at-Risk at signicance level α (0, 1) is given by V ar α (X) = inf {x R : F X (x) α}. Note that for a continuous random variable X with strictly increasing cdf, V ar α (X) = F 1 X (α), is also called the α-quantile, where F 1 X is the inverse function of cdf. It is well known that VaR is not a coherent risk measure since it is not subadditive. Moreover, VaR fails to give any information beyond the level α. Therefore, risk measures which quantify the magnitude of loss of the worst 100(1 α)% cases are developed, such as the Tail Conditional Expectation (TCE), the Worst Conditional Expectation (WCE), the Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) and the Expected Shortfall (ES). Denition For a random variable X on a probability space (Ω, F, P) with cdf F X and V ar α (X) dened in Denition 2.2.1, the Tail Conditional Expectation at signicance level
16 2. Univariate Risk Measures 7 α [0, 1] is given by T CE α (X) = E [X X V ar α (X)]. If X is a continuous random variable, T CE α (X) could be wrote into the following form, T CE α (X) = T V ar α (X) = 1 1 α 1 α V ar u (X)du. TCE proposed by Artzner et al. (1999) measures the average loss given that the loss is no less than the 100α% of all possible cases. However, like VaR, it is not coherent since the subadditivity can only be satised when the random variable is continuous. To gure out this problem, the Worst Conditional Expectation is proposed in the same article. Denition For a random variable X on a probability space (Ω, F, P) with cdf F X, the Worst Conditional Expectation at signicance level α [0, 1] is dened by W CE α (X) = sup {E[X A] P (A) 1 α, A F}. WCE is the maximum expected loss of at least 100(1 α)% cases. Hence, it depends not only on the distribution of X but also on the structure of the underlying probability space. Thus, it seems hopeless to compute the value of it in practice, when the probability space is innite. Therefore, to nd a coherent risk measure which is computable, Rockafellar and Uryasev (2000) propose the CVaR. Denition For a random variable X on a probability space (Ω, F, P) with cdf F X, the Conditional Value-at-Risk at signicance level α [0, 1) is dened by } E[X a]+ CV ar α (X) = inf {a + : a R. 1 α
17 2. Univariate Risk Measures 8 Note the number a is selected to minimize the value of CVaR. CVaR is dened without VaR and it is subadditive, which makes this measure used to optimize portfolios. In addition, ES is proposed by Acerbi and Tasche (2002), making some modications on the denition of TCE such that ES is subadditive when the distribution is discrete. Denition For a random variable X on a probability space (Ω, F, P) with cdf F X and V ar α (X) dened as in Denition 2.2.1, the Expected Shortfall at signicance level α [0, 1) is dened by ES α (X) = 1 { E[X1{X V arα(x)}] + V ar α (X)[1 α P (X V ar α (X))] }. 1 α Acerbi and Tasche (2002) show that the ES is a coherent risk measure (see, e.g., [1] for details) and discuss the relationships between the TCE, WCE, CVaR and ES, considering that all of these risk measures are used to evaluate the same thing i.e. the expected losses of the worst 100(1 α)% cases. The dierences in denitions lead to the dierences in the numerical results (see, section 2.4 for details) and properties. Proposition For a discrete random variable X, W CE α (X), T CE α (X), CV ar α (X) and ES α (X) have the following relationships, T CE α (X) W CE α (X) ES α (X) CV ar α (X). Proposition For a continuous random variable X, W CE α (X), T CE α (X), CV ar α (X) and ES α (X) have the following relationships, T CE α (X) = W CE α (X) = ES α (X) = CV ar α (X). Note that Proposition and Proposition are proved by Acerbi and Tasche (2002) (see, e.g., [1] for details).
18 2. Univariate Risk Measures 9 In next section, we will discuss the robustness of the risk measures presented so far. 2.3 Robustness Proposition For a continuous random variable X with cdf F, the sensitivity function of V ar α (X) is given by S(z) = 1 α, f(v ar α(f )) α, f(v ar α(f )) z < V ar α(x) z > V ar α(x) 0, z = V ar α (X) which is a bounded function. Thus, VaR is a robust risk measure. Note, V ar α (F ) V ar α (X) since VaR is a distribution-based risk measure. The way to prove the Proposition is presented by Cont et al. (2010). The basic idea is to measure the eect of the small change at a point on the risk measures using the sensitivity function. A bounded sensitivity function can be obtained for the robust risk measure. Proof. Fix z R and set F ε = εδ z + (1 ε)f such that F 0 F, where F D and the direction of change δ z D. The distribution F ε is dierentiable at any x z with F ε(x) = (1 ε)f(x) > 0 and has a jump (of size ε [0, 1)) at the point x = z. Hence, F ( 1 α 1 ε), α < (1 ε)f (z) V ar α (F ε ) = Fε 1 (α) = F ( ) 1 α ε 1 ε, α (1 ε)f (z) + ε z, otherwise. Thus, the sensitivity function of V ar α (X) can be evaluated by
19 2. Univariate Risk Measures 10 [ ] V ar α (F ε ) V ar α (F ) d S(z) = lim = ε 0 + ε dε V ar α(f ε ) ε=0 1 α, z < V ar f(v ar α(f )) α(x) = α, z > V ar f(v ar α(f )) α(x) 0, z = V ar α (X). Note that the sensitivity function of V ar α (X) is bounded by two horizontal lines and has a jump point at z = V ar α (X). Consider a dataset with V ar α (X). Then, adding a value smaller than V ar α (X) would decrease V ar α (X) and vice versa. Proposition For a continuous random variable X, let ρ(x) = T CE α (X) = W CE α (X) = CV ar α (X) = ES α (X). Then, the sensitivity function of ρ(x) is given by V ar α (X) ρ(x), z < V ar α (X) S(z) = z αv ar α(x) ρ(x), z V ar 1 α α (X). Note, T CE α (X), W CE α (X), CV ar α (X) and ES α (X) have unbounded sensitivity functions, which means they are not robust. Proof. Let ρ(x) = T CE α (X) = W CE α (X) = ES α (X) = CV ar α (X), then the sensitivity function of ρ(x) is given by
20 2. Univariate Risk Measures 11 { 1 1 S(z) = lim ε α α = α = 1 1 α α 1 α lim ε 0 + } V ar u (F ε ) V ar u (F ) du ε { V aru (F ε ) V ar u (F ) ε [ ] d dε V ar u(f ε ) du ε=0 } du = α α 1 1 α [ d F ( )] 1 u ε du, F (z) < α dε 1 ε ε=0 { F (z) α [ d F ( 1 u dε 1 ε )]ε=0 du + 1 F (z) [ d F ( } 1 u ε dε 1 ε )]ε=0 du, F (z) α = V ar α (X) ρ(x), z < V ar α (X) z αv ar α(x) 1 α ρ(x), z V ar α (X). Note that the sensitivity function of ρ(x) is a linear function of z. When the jump happens on the right tail of the distribution, it goes to innity. Therefore, T CE α (X), W CE α (X), ES α (X) and CV ar α (X) are not robust. Since risk measures providing information on tails of distribution are not robust, Cont et al. (2010) present the Range Value-at-Risk. Denition For a continuous random variable X with cdf F X, the univariate Range
21 2. Univariate Risk Measures 12 Value-at-Risk at level range [α 1, α 2 ] [0, 1] is dened by RV ar α1,α 2 (X) = E [X V ar α1 (X) X V ar α2 (X)] = 1 α 2 α 1 α2 α 1 V ar u (X)du. Note that RV ar α1,α 2 (X) is not a coherent risk measure since it does not satisfy the subadditivity. For α 2 < 1, RV ar α1,α 2 (X) is always well bounded, RV ar α1,α 2 (X) = 1 α 2 α 1 1 α 2 α 1 α2 α 1 α2 α 1 V ar u (X)du V ar α2 (X)du = V ar α2 (X). Moreover, the robustness of RVaR can be proved in the same way as the one we used before. Proposition For a continuous random variable X with cdf F, RVaR is not sensitive to the small change at any point x. In other word, its sensitivity function is bounded and given by S(z) = (1 α 1 )V ar α1 (X) (1 α 2 )V ar α2 (X) α 2 α 1 RV ar α1,α 2 (X), z < V ar α1 (X) z α 1 V ar α1 (X) (1 α 2 )V ar α2 (X) α 2 α 1 RV ar α1,α 2 (X), V ar α1 (X) z V ar α2 (X) α 2 V ar α2 (X) α 1 V ar α1 (X) α 2 α 1 RV ar α1,α 2 (X), z > V ar α2 (X) which means RVaR is a robust risk measure. Proof. The sensitivity function of RV ar α1,α 2 (X) can be obtained as follows.
22 2. Univariate Risk Measures 13 { 1 α2 S(z) = lim ε 0 + α 2 α 1 = 1 α2 α 2 α 1 α 1 lim ε 0 + V ar u (F ε ) V ar u (F ) α 1 ε { V aru (F ε ) V ar u (F ) = 1 α2 [ ] d α 2 α 1 α 1 dε V ar u(f ε ) du ε=0 ε } du } du = = 1 α 2 α 1 α2 α 1 [ d F ( )] 1 u ε du, F (z) < α dε 1 ε ε=0 1 { 1 F (z) [ d F ( 1 u α 2 α 1 α 1 dε 1 ε )]ε=0 du + α 2 F (z) [ d F ( } 1 u ε dε 1 ε )]ε=0 du, α 1 F (z) α 2 1 α2 [ d F ( )] 1 u du, F (z) > α α 2 α 1 α 1 dε 1 ε ε=0 2 (1 α 1 )V ar α1 (X) (1 α 2 )V ar α2 (X) α 2 α 1 RV ar α1,α 2 (X), z < V ar α1 (X) z α 1 V ar α1 (X) (1 α 2 )V ar α2 (X) α 2 α 1 RV ar α1,α 2 (X), V ar α1 (X) z V ar α2 (X) α 2 V ar α2 (X) α 1 V ar α1 (X) α 2 α 1 RV ar α1,α 2 (X), z > V ar α2 (X). This result shows that the sensitivity function of RV ar α1,α 2 (X) is linear in z over the interval [V ar α1 (X), V ar α2 (X)] and constant over other intervals. It is bounded, which means RVaR is a robust risk measure.
23 2. Univariate Risk Measures Numerical Examples In this section, the examples for discrete and continuous random variables are presented, respectively. The results illustrate relationships between the risk measures we discussed in the previous sections. Example Let X, which is the loss of a policy, be a discrete random variable with the probability distribution as list in the following Table. Tab. 2.1: Probability distribution of the discrete variable X Ω ω 1 ω 2 ω 3 ω 4 ω 5 X P (X = x i ) 20% 30% 10% 30% 10% Let α = 80%, then V ar 0.8 (X) = 3 2 = 1.5 can make sure that 80% of losses can be covered. Then, T CE 0.8 (X) = E[X X V ar 0.8 ] = can be evaluated based on the value of V ar 0.8 (X) = = W CE 0.8 (X) can be calculated by maximizing the expectation of the events set which happens with probability larger than 0.2. Therefore, the events set A = {ω 3, ω 5 } will be selected after comparing the results of dierent combinations. Then, W CE 0.8 (X) = = 2.
24 CV ar α (X) = inf then {a + E[X a]+ 1 α 2. Univariate Risk Measures 15 } : a R, in this case we choose a = V ar 0.8 (X) = 3, 2 CV ar 0.8 (X) = (3 3 2 ) is the minima for any possible value of a. = 9 4 = 2.25 { ES α (X) = 1 E[X1{X V 1 α arα(x)}] + V ar α (X)[1 α P (X V ar α (X))] }, therefore { 1 3 ES 0.8 (X) = } ( ) = The results show that T CE α (X) W CE α (X) ES α (X) CV ar α (X), which coincides with the Proposition Example Consider a continuous random variable X with cdf F (x). According to the Denition 2.2.2, T CE α (X) = 1 1 α 1 α V ar u (X)du Furthermore, let A = {X V ar α (X)} such that W CE α (X) can be maximized. Then, Moreover, when a = V ar α (X), W CE α (X) = sup {E[X A] P (A) 1 α, A F} CV ar α (X) = a + = E[X X V ar α (X)] = T CE α (X). E[X a]+ 1 α = V ar α (X) + E[X V ar α(x)] + 1 α V ar = V ar α (X) + [x V ar α(x) α(x)]df (x) 1 α = 1 1 V ar u (X)du = T CE α (X). 1 α α
25 2. Univariate Risk Measures 16 Finally, ES α (X) = 1 { E[X1{X V arα(x)}] + V ar α (X) [1 α P (X V ar α (X))] } 1 α { } = 1 1 α = 1 1 α 1 α xdf (x) + V ar α (X) [1 α (1 α)] V ar α(x) V ar u (X)du = T CE α (X). In conclusion, for a continuous random variable, T CE α (X) = W CE α (X) = ES α (X) = CV ar α (X). Let Y N(µ, σ 2 ) such that X = e Y is a log-normal distributed random variable. Then the cumulative distribution function of X is given by ( ) ln x µ F (x) = Φ V ar α (X) = e σφ 1 (α)+µ, σ where Φ refers to the standard normal distribution. T CE α (X) = W CE α (X) = ES α (X) = CV ar α (X) = 1 1 α = 1 1 α = eµ+ 1 2 σ2 1 α 1 α 1 α V ar u (X)du e σφ 1 (u)+µ du [ Φ ( σ Φ 1 (α) )]. The result is obtained by using a change of variable of the form a = Φ 1 (u). In the next example, simulation results are obtained to show the robustness of risk measures. Example To estimate risk measures mentioned in the Example 2.4.2, we generate two data sets with sample size n = 100 from a log-normal distribution with the same mean E(X) = 100 and coecients of variation CV (X) = V ar(x)/e(x) taking values 1 and 2, respectively. Then the parameters (µ, σ) for each groups are (4.2586, ) and (3.8005, ).
26 2. Univariate Risk Measures 17 Let X (1), X (2),..., X ([nα]), X ([nα]+1),..., X (n) denote the data in the sample arranged in increasing order. Then, for n large enough, the empirical estimator of V ar α (X) will be the statistics X ([nα]+1). The empirical estimator of ρ(x) = T CE α (X) = W CE α (X) = ES α (X) = CV ar α (X) is given by ρ(x) = X ([nα]+1) X (n). n [nα] Moreover, RV ar α1,α 2 (X) can be calculated as RV ar α1,α 2 (X) = 1 α 2 α 1 V arα2 (X) V ar α1 (X) 1 t (ln t µ) 2 2πσ 2 te 2σ 2 dt = eµ+ 1 2 σ2 α 2 α 1 [ Φ ( σ Φ 1 (α 1 ) ) Φ ( σ Φ 1 (α 2 ) )], where Φ refers to the standard normal cumulative distribution function. The empirical estimator of RV ar α1,α 2 (X) is dened by RV ar α1,α 2 (X) = X ([nα 1 ]+1) X ([nα2 ]+1). [nα 2 ] [nα 1 ] + 1 The simulation results are presented in the Table 2.2, with α 2 = Tab. 2.2: RV ar α1,α 2 (X) and ρ(x) RV ar α1,α 2 (X) RV ar α1,α 2 (X) ρ(x) ρ(x) CV α 1 = α 1 = The dependence of these risk measures on dierent signicance levels is observed, risk measures are increasing with α 1. Furthermore, Table 2.2 shows that RV ar α1,α 2 (X) is more robust than T CE α (X), W CE α (X), ES α (X) and CV ar α (X) since large variance has a smaller impact on this statistic.
27 3. MULTIVARIATE RISK MEASURES We have reviewed several popular univariate risk measures and examined their properties and robustness. Before discussing properties and robustness of some established multivariate risk measures, we review copulas which are frequently used to model dependent random variables. 3.1 Copulas Denition Let X = {X 1, X 2,..., X d } be a random vector with cdf F. Set U i = F i (x i ) U[0, 1], i = 1,..., d. Then, the copula C : [0, 1] d [0, 1] of F is given by C(u 1,..., u d ) = P (U 1 u 1,..., U d u d ), u i [0, 1], i = 1,..., n. This denition is proposed by Nelsen (1999). Moreover, for a random vector (U 1,..., U d ) with cdf C, P (a 1 U 1 b 1,..., a d U d b d ) is non-negative. Furthermore, Sklar's theorem (see Sklar (1959)) states that any multivariate cumulative distibution function can be expressed in terms of its marginal distributions and a copula. Theorem (Sklar's Theorem) Let F be a d-dimensional distribution function with marginal distributions F 1,..., F d, then there exists a copula C such that F (x 1,..., x d ) = C(F 1 (x 1 ),..., F d (x d )).
28 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 19 Note, if F 1,..., F d are continuous, then C is unique. In this thesis we mainly discuss bivariate risk measures. Consider X 1 and X 2 with marginal cdf's F 1 and F 2, respectively. Then, we have F (x 1, x 2 ) = C(F 1 (x 1 ), F 2 (x 2 )). For what follows, the survival copula is dened by C(u 1, u 2 ) = P (U 1 > u 1, U 2 > u 2 ) = 1 P (U 1 u 1 ) P (U 2 u 2 ) + P (U 1 u 1, U 2 u 2 ) = 1 u 1 u 2 + C(u 1, u 2 ), (u 1, u 2 ) [0, 1] 2. Finally, we will evaluate the empirical estimators of bivariate risk measures in Chapter 4 with the empirical copula C n. For a random sample (X l1, X l2 ), l = 1,..., n, C n is dened by C n (u 1, u 2 ) = 1 n n 1 {Fn,1 (X l1 ) u 1,F n,2 (X l2 ) u 2 }, l=1 where F n,i represents the empirical cdf of X i = {X 1i,..., X ni }, i = 1, 2. Well known copulas and families of copulas are dened as follow. Fréchet Family First, we consider a pair of independent random variables. If X 1 is independent of X 2, then F (x 1, x 2 ) = F 1 (x 1 )F 2 (x 2 ), (x 1, x 2 ) R 2, or Π(u 1, u 2 ) = u 1 u 2, (u 1, u 2 ) [0, 1] 2.
29 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 20 Also, one has the upper and lower Fréchet-Hoeding bounds proposed in Fréchet (1951) and Hoeding (1940), respectively M(u 1, u 2 ) = min(u 1, u 2 ), W (u 1, u 2 ) = max(0, u 1 + u 2 1), for (u 1, u 2 ) [0, 1] 2. Theorem For an arbitrary bivariate copula C : [0, 1] 2 [0, 1] and any (u 1, u 2 ) [0, 1] 2, W (u 1, u 2 ) C(u 1, u 2 ) M(u 1, u 2 ). Note M(u 1, u 2 ) indicates that random variables are comonotonic (perfect positive dependence) whereas W (u 1, u 2 ) indicates that random variables are countermonotonic (perfect negative dependence). Archimedean Family The Archimedean Family introduced by Nelsen (2006) is of the form C(u 1, u 2 ; θ) = ψ 1 (ψ(u 1 ; θ) + ψ(u 2 ; θ); θ), (u 1, u 2 ) [0, 1] 2, θ Θ, where ψ is the generator function and satises following properties, (1) ψ(0) = and ψ(1) = 0, (2) ψ (t) < 0, (3) ψ (t) > 0. Moreover, the parameter θ dictates the dependence between the random variables. Below are presented some Archimedean copulas, most of which will be used throughout this thesis.
30 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 21 (1) Gumbel Copula For θ [1, ), the Gumbel copula is given by C(u 1, u 2 ; θ) = e {[ ln(u 1)] θ +[ ln(u 2 )] θ } 1 θ, with the generator ψ(t; θ) = ( ln (t)) θ and the inverse generator ψ 1 (t; θ) = e t 1 θ. Specially, for θ = 1, we have is the independent copula. (2) Frank Copula C(u 1, u 2 ) = e {[ ln(u 1)]+[ ln(u 2 )]} = u 1 u 2 = Π(u 1, u 2 ), For θ (, 0) (0, ), the Frank copula is dened by C(u 1, u 2 ; θ) = 1 θ ln [1 + (e θu 1 1)(e θu 2 1) ], e θ 1 with the generator ψ(t; θ) = ln( e θt 1 e θ 1 ) and the inverse generator ψ 1 (t; θ) = 1 θ ln [1 + e t (e θ 1)]. (2) Clayton Copula For θ [ 1, 0) (0, ), we have the Clayton copula dened by C(u 1, u 2 ; θ) = (u θ 1 + u θ 2 1) 1 θ, with the generator ψ(t; θ) = 1 θ (t θ 1) and the inverse generator ψ 1 (t; θ) = (1 + θt) 1 θ. Note, Π(u 1, u 2 ) is obtained if θ = 0. Moreover, W (u 1, u 2 ) and M(u 1, u 2 ) are attained by setting θ = 1 and θ, respectively. Figure 3.1 and Figure 3.2 show the dependence structure of variables with Gumbel, Frank and Clayton copulas, respectively. Frank copula is relatively symmetric, whereas Gumbel and Clayton copulas have stronger dependence in the right and left tails, respectively.
31 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 22 Fig. 3.1: Gumbel and Frank Copulas with dependent parameters θ = 2 and θ = 5
32 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 23 Fig. 3.2: Clayton Copula with dependent parameters θ = Bivariate VaR and TVaR First, let us introduce the bivariate orthant based VaR proposed by Embrechts and Puccetti (2006). Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) be a random vector with joint cdf FX and joint suvivial function (sf) FX. At signicance level α [0, 1], the bivariate lower orthant VaR is dened by V ar α (X) = {x R 2 : FX(x) α}, (eq. 3.1) and bivariate upper orthant VaR is dened by V ar α (X) = {x R 2 : FX(x) 1 α}. (eq. 3.2)
33 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 24 Note, in a bivariate setting, the relationship between the cumulative distribution function and the survival function, namely F (x) = 1 F (x), does not hold. For this reason, bivariate VaR need to be dened as the lower and upper orthant VaR separately using either the cdf or sf. In addition, denotes the boundary of the set. To study the behavior of bivariate orthant based VaR and get the bivariate extension of TVaR, Cossette et al. (2013, 2015) rewrite Eq. 3.1 and Eq Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) be a random vector with joint cdf FX and joint sf FX. At signicance level α [0, 1], the bivariate lower orthant VaR is dened by V ar α (X) = {(x 1, V ar α,x1 (X)), x 1 V ar α (X 1 )}, or V ar α (X) = {(V ar α,x2 (X), x 2 ), x 2 V ar α (X 2 )}, and the bivariate upper orthant VaR is dened by V ar α (X) = {(x 1, V ar α,x1 (X)), x 1 V ar α (X 1 )}, or For i, j = 1, 2 (i j), V ar α (X) = {(V ar α,x2 (X), x 2 ), x 2 V ar α (X 2 )}. V ar α,xi (X) = V ar α (X F Xi (x i j X ) i x i ), x i V ar α (X i ) and V ar α,xi (X) = V ar α F Xi (x i ) (X j X i x i ), x i V ar α (X i ). 1 F Xi (x i ) Example Consider the random vector (X 1, X 2 ) with joint cdf is dened with a Gumbel copula with dependent parameter θ = 1.5 and marginals X 1 Weibull (2, 50) and X 2
34 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 25 Weibull (2, 150). Then, we get V ar 0.95,x1 (X) on Figure 3.3 and V ar 0.99,x1 (X) on Figure 3.4. Let u x1 (respectively u x2 ) and l x1 (respectively l x2 ) denote the essential upper and lower support of X 1 (respectively X 2 ). Note, V ar 0.95,x1 (X) [V ar 0.95 (X 1 ), u x1 ] [V ar 0.95 (X 2 ), u x2 ], and V ar 0.99,x1 (X) [l x1, V ar 0.99 (X 1 )] [l x2, V ar 0.99 (X 2 )]. Also, Figure 3.3 and Figure 3.4 show the convexity of the curve which has been studied in Cossette et al. (2013). Fig. 3.3: Lower orthant VaR at level 0.95
35 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 26 Fig. 3.4: Upper orthant VaR at level 0.99
36 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 27 Proposition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) be a continuous random vector. Let φ 1 and φ 2 be real functions dened on the supports of X 1 and X 2, respectively. 1. (Translation invariance) For all c = (c 1, c 2 ) R 2 and i, j = 1, 2, i j, then V ar α,xj +c j (X + c) = V ar α,xj (X) + c i, V ar α,xj +c j (X + c) = V ar α,xj (X) + c i. 2. (Positive homogeneity) For all c = (c 1, c 2 ) R 2 + and i, j = 1, 2, i j, then V ar α,cj x j (cx) = c i V ar α,xj (X), V ar α,cj x j (cx) = c i V ar α,xj (X). 3. (Negative transformations) For all c = (c 1, c 2 ) R 2 and i, j = 1, 2, i j, then V ar α,cj x j (cx) = c i V ar 1 α,xj (X), V ar α,cj x j (cx) = c i V ar 1 α,xj (X). In general, (1) For increasing functions φ 1 and φ 2, i, j = 1, 2, i j, V ar α,φj (x j )(φ(x)) = φ i (V ar α,xj (X)), V ar α,φj (x j )(φ(x)) = φ i (V ar α,xj (X)). (2) For decreasing functions φ 1 and φ 2, i, j = 1, 2, i j, V ar α,φj (x j )(φ(x)) = φ i (V ar 1 α,xj (X)), V ar α,φj (x j )(φ(x)) = φ i (V ar 1 α,xj (X)).
37 3. Multivariate Risk Measures (Monotonicity) Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) and X = (X 1, X 2) be two pairs of risks with joint cdf's FX and FX respectively. X is said to be more concordant than X, denoted X co X, if FX(x) FX (x) for all x R2. Then, V ar α (X ) V ar α (X), V ar α (X) V ar α (X ). Proof. The proof of Proposition is presented in Cossette et al. (2013). Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) be a random vector with joint cdf FX and joint suvivial function (sf) FX. At signicance level α [0, 1], the bivariate lower orthant TVaR is given by T V ar α (X) = {( x i, T V ar α,xi (X) ), x i V ar α (X i ), i = 1, 2 }, and bivariate upper orthant TVaR is given by T V ar α (X) = { ( x i, T V ar α,xi (X) ), x i V ar α (X i ), i = 1, 2}. Note that for i, j = 1, 2 (i j), and T V ar α,xi (X) = E[X j X j > V ar α,xi (X), X i x i ] = 1 F Xi (x i ) α FXi (x i ) α V ar u,xi (X)du, T V ar α,xi (X) = E[X j X j > V ar α,xi (X), X i x i ] = 1 1 α 1 α V ar v,xi (X)dv. Example Consider the same random vector dened in Example with signicance level α = T V ar 0.99,x1 (X) (respectively T V ar 0.99,x1 (X)) is obtained based on the Denition For comparison, we also plot V ar 0.99,x1 (X) (respectively V ar 0.99,x1 (X)) on
38 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 29 Figure 3.5 and Figure 3.6. Note that T V ar 0.99,x1 (X) (respectively T V ar 0.99,x1 (X)) goes to T V ar 0.99 (X 2 ) when X 1 approaches to u x1 (respectively l x1 ). These results are obtained using the numerical integration tools in Matlab. Fig. 3.5: Lower orthant VaR and TVaR at level 0.99
39 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 30 Fig. 3.6: Upper orthant VaR and TVaR at level 0.99
40 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 31 Proposition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) be a continuous random vector. 1. (Translation invariance) For all c = (c 1, c 2 ) R 2 and i, j = 1, 2, i j, then T V ar α,xj +c j (X + c) = T V ar α,xj (X) + c i, T V ar α,xj +c j (X + c) = T V ar α,xj (X) + c i. 2. (Positive homogeneity) For all c = (c 1, c 2 ) R 2 + and i, j = 1, 2, i j, then T V ar α,cj x j (cx) = c i T V ar α,xj (X), T V ar α,cj x j (cx) = c i T V ar α,xj (X). 3. (Monotonicity) Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) and X = (X 1, X 2) be two pairs of risks with joint cdf FX and FX respectively. If X co X, then T V ar α (X ) T V ar α (X), T V ar α (X) T V ar α (X ). Proof. The proof of Proposition can be found in Cossette et al. (2015). Jouini et al. (2004), Bentahar (2006) and Tahar and Lépinette (2012, 2014) extend the multivariate WCE and TCE. Furthermore, Cousin and Di Bernardino (2013, 2014, 2015) propose a series of multivariate risk measures developed from a dierent aspect. Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) denote a bivariate random vector on the probability space (Ω, F, P). For α [0, 1], the vector-valued Worst Conditional Expectation at level α is dened by W CE α (X) = { x R 2 : E[x X A] 0, A F such that P (A) 1 α }. Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) denote a bivariate random vector on the probability space (Ω, F, P). For α [0, 1], the vector-valued Tail Conditional Expectation at level α is
41 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 32 dened by T CE α (X) = {x R 2 : E[x X X A] 0, A Q α (X)}, where Q α (X) = {A R 2 : P (X A) 1 α}. Note that the vector-valued W CE α (X) and T CE α (X) are the natural extension of their real-valued versions. Therefore, they share similar properties. Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) denote a bivariate random vector on the probability space (Ω, F, P). For α [0, 1], the Generalized Worst Conditional Expectation at level α is dened by GW CE α (X) = X W CE α ( X), where random variables X on ( Ω, F, P) having the same distribution as X. Proposition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) denote a bivariate random vector on the probability space (Ω, F, P) having a continuous probability density. Then W CE α (X) = T CE α (X) = GW CE α (X). The proof of this Proposition is presented in [4]. Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) denote a bivariate random vector on the probability space (Ω, F, P) with joint cdf FX and joint sf FX. The multivariate lower-orthant V ar at level α [0, 1] is dened by V ar α(x) = E[X FX(X) = α], and the multivariate upper-orthant V ar is dened by V ar α(x) = E[X FX(X) = 1 α].
42 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 33 Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) denote a bivariate random vector on the probability space (Ω, F, P) with joint cdf FX and joint sf FX. The multivariate lower-orthant Conditional Tail Expectation at level α [0, 1] is dened by CT E α (X) = E[X FX(X) α], and the multivariate upper-orthant Conditional Tail Expectation is dened by CT E α (X) = E[X FX(X) 1 α]. Denition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) denote a bivariate random vector on the probability space (Ω, F, P) with joint cdf FX and joint sf FX. multivariate lower-orthant CoVaR is dened by For a signicant level α [0, 1], the CoV ar α,ω (X) = V ar ω (X FX(X) = α), and the multivariate upper-orthant CoVaR is dened by CoV ar α,ω (X) = V ar ω (X FX(X) = 1 α), where ω = {ω 1, ω 2 } is the signicance level vector of marginal risk with ω i [0, 1]. Note that similar properties mentioned in the Proposition also hold for the multivariate upper and lower orthant VaR, CTE and CoVaR (see, e.g., [9], [10], [11] for details). 3.3 Bivariate Lower Orthant RVaR In the following part of this chapter, we will propose a new multivariate risk measure called bivariate lower and upper orthant RVaR based on the results in Cossette et al. (2013, 2015). Its properties, such as translation invariance, positive homogeneity and monotonicity, will be discussed.
43 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 34 Denition Consider a continuous random vector X = (X 1, X 2 ) on the probability space (Ω, F, P). Bivariate lower orthant RVaR at level range [α 1, α 2 ] [0, 1] is given by RV ar α1,α 2 (X) = ((x 1, RV ar α1,α 2,x 1 (X)), (RV ar α1,α 2,x 2 (X), x 2 )), where RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = E[X j V ar α1,x i (X) X j V ar α2 (X j ), X i x i ], for V ar α1,v ar α2 (X j )(X) x i V ar α2 (X i ), i, j = 1, 2(i j). This denition is based on the univariate RVaR and bivariate lower orthant VaR. As we can see, RV ar α1,α 2 (X) is the expectation of a random variable X given that it belongs to the interval [V ar α1 (X), V ar α2 (X)]. Hence, we start from bounding the X in the rectangle area [V ar α1 (X i ), V ar α2 (X i )] [V ar α1 (X j ), V ar α2 (X j )]. Considering the eect of the random variable X i on X j, V ar α1,x i (X) and V ar α2,x i (X) are applied. However, only V ar α1,x i (X) could lie in the above area, which has been shown in Example Therefore, we require V ar α1,x i (X) X j V ar α2 (X j ) to make sure that the lower bound at level α 1 can be achieved and the upper bound at level α 2 will not be exceeded. The next result shows that RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) has a similar expression as T V ar α,xi (X) which can be expressed as the integration of V ar α,xi (X). Proposition For a continuous random vector X = (X 1, X 2 ) with joint cdf F (x 1, x 2 ) and marginal cdf's F X1 (x 1 ) and F X2 (x 2 ), RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) can be restated as RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = 1 F (x i, V ar α2 (X j )) α 1 F (xi,v ar α2 (X j )) α 1 V ar u,xi (X)du,
44 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 35 for V ar α1,v ar α2 (X j )(X) x i V ar α2 (X i ), i, j = 1, 2(i j). Proof. RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = E[X j V ar α1,x i (X) X j V ar α2 (X j ), X i x i ] V arα2 (X j ) x j df Xi (x j ) = V ar α1,x (X) i F Xi (x i ) = F (x i, V ar α2 (X j )) α 1 F (x i,v ar α2 (X j )) F Xi (x i α 1 ) F Xi (x i ) V arα2 (X j ) V ar α1,x i (X) x j df Xi (x j ). Note, we have V ar α,xi (X) = V ar α (X F Xi (x i j X ) i x i ). Then, using u = F Xi (x j ) = P (X j x j X i x i ), F Xi (x i ) RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = F (x i, V ar α2 (X j )) α 1 1 = F (x i, V ar α2 (X j )) α 1 1 = F (x i, V ar α2 (X j )) α 1 1 = F (x i, V ar α2 (X j )) α 1 FXi (V ar α2 (X j )) F 1 X i (u)du α 1 /F Xi (x i ) FXi (V ar α2 (X j )F Xi (x i )) F 1 X i ( α 1 FXi (V ar α2 (X j )F Xi (x i )) α 1 F (xi,v ar α2 (X j )) α 1 u F Xi (x i ) )du V ar u,xi (X)du V ar u,xi (X)du. Example Consider the random vector X = (X 1, X 2 ) dened in Example Let the condence level range be α 1 = 0.95 and α 2 = Then, we get bivariate lower orthant RVaR in Figure 3.7 and Figure 3.8. For comparison, we plot V ar 0.95,xi (X) on the same graph.
45 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 36 Fig. 3.7: Lower orthant VaR at level 0.95 and RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] for xed values of X 1
46 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 37 Fig. 3.8: Lower orthant VaR at level 0.95 and RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] for xed values of X 2 The shape of the lower orthant RVaR curve is shown in Figure 3.7 and Figure 3.8. One can observe that RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) converges to the univariate RVaR when x i (i = 1, 2) approaches innity. Also, when x i gets close to V ar α1 (X i ), RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) approaches V ar α2 (X j ).
47 3. Multivariate Risk Measures Bivariate Upper Orthant RVaR Denition Consider a continuous random vector X = (X 1, X 2 ) on the probability space (Ω, F, P). Bivariate upper orthant RVaR at level range [α 1, α 2 ] [0, 1] is given by RV ar α1,α 2 (X) = ((x 1, RV ar α1,α 2,x 1 (X)), (RV ar α1,α 2,x 2 (X), x 2 )), where RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = E[X j V ar α1 (X j ) X j V ar α2,x i (X), X i x i ], for V ar α1 (X i ) x i V ar α2,v ar α1 (X j )(X), i, j = 1, 2(i j). Similarly as for the lower orthant RVaR we can dene the bivariate upper orthant RVaR. We consider the impact of the random variable X i on X j and require that V ar α1 (X j ) X j V ar α2,x i (X) to make sure that the upper level α 2 can be achieved and the lower level α 1 will not be exceeded. Note, here we only modify the upper bound of the interval since only the curve V ar α2,x i (X) could lie in the bounded area [V ar α1 (X i ), V ar α2 (X i )] [V ar α1 (X j ), V ar α2 (X j )]. The following result provides the expression of RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) in the form of the integration of V ar α,xi (X). Proposition Consider X = (X 1, X 2 ) with joint sf F (x1, x 2 ) and marginal sf's F X2 (x 2 ) and F X2 (x 2 ), respectively. Then, RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) can be expressed by for RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = 1 α2 α 2 (1 F V ar v,xi (X)dv, (x i, V ar α1 (X j ))) 1 F (x i,v ar α1 (X j )) V ar α1 (X i ) x i V ar α2,v ar α1 (X j )(X), i, j = 1, 2(i j).
48 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 39 Proof. We have that Note, one has RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = E[X j V ar α1 (X j ) X j V ar α2,x i (X), X i x i ] = = V arα2,x i (X) V ar α1 (X j ) x j df Xi (x j ) F (x i,v ar α1 (X j )) 1 F Xi (x i ) 1 α 2 1 F Xi (x i ) 1 F Xi (x i ) V arα2,xi (X) x j df Xi (x j ). F (x i, V ar α1 (X j )) 1 + α 2 V ar α1 (X j ) V ar α,xi (X) = V ar α F Xi (x i ) (X j X i x i ). Then, using v = F Xi (x j ) = P (X j x j X i x i ), 1 F Xi (x i ) α2 FXi 1 F Xi (x i ) RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = F (x i, V ar α1 (X j )) 1 + α 2 = 1 F (x i, V ar α1 (X j )) 1 + α 2 α2 1 = α 2 (1 F (x i, V ar α1 (X j ))) (x i ) 1 F Xi (x i ) 1 F Xi (V arα 1 (X j )) 1 F Xi (x i ) 1 F Xi (V ar α1 (X j )) α2 1 F (x i,v ar α1 (X j )) F 1 X i (v)dv F 1 X i ( v F X i (x i ) 1 F Xi (x i ) )dv V ar v,xi (X)dv. Example According Proposition 3.4.1, one gets the curve of RV ar α1,α 2,x 1 (X) and RV ar α1,α 2,x 2 (X) in Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10, respectively. For comparison, we plot the curve of the upper orthant V ar in the same graph.
49 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 40 Fig. 3.9: Upper orthant VaR at level 0.99 and RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] for xed values of X 1
50 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 41 Fig. 3.10: Upper orthant VaR at level 0.99 and RVaR at level range [0.95, 0.99] for xed values of X 2 Figure 3.9 and Figure 3.10 show the shape of the upper orthant RVaR curve. RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) converges to RV ar 0.95,0.99 (X j ) when x i (i = 1, 2) gets close to lower support of X i. Also, when x i approaches V ar α2 (X i ), RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) approaches V ar α1 (X j ). As a result, the curves of bivariate RVaR are bounded by the curves of univariate VaR, which is similar to the univariate RVaR.
51 3. Multivariate Risk Measures Properties of Bivariate RVaR Proposition Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) be a continuous random vector. 1. (Translation invariance) For all c = (c 1, c 2 ) R 2 and i, j = 1, 2, i j, then RV ar α1,α 2,x j +c j (X + c) = RV ar α1,α 2,x j (X) + c i, RV ar α1,α 2,x j +c j (X + c) = RV ar α1,α 2,x j (X) + c i. 2. (Positive homogeneity) For all c = (c 1, c 2 ) R 2 + and i, j = 1, 2, i j, then RV ar α1,α 2,c j x j (cx) = c i RV ar α1,α 2,x j (X), RV ar α1,α 2,c j x j (cx) = c i RV ar α1,α 2,x j (X). 3. (Monotonicity) Let X = (X 1, X 2 ) and X = (X 1, X 2) be two pairs of risks with joint cdf's FX and FX respectively. If X co X, then RV ar α1,α 2 (X ) RV ar α1,α 2 (X), RV ar α1,α 2 (X) RV ar α1,α 2 (X ). Proof. Here we need to use the properties of bivariate VaR in Proposition to proof the above results. For Translation invariance, RV ar α1,α 2,x j +c j (X + c) = = = F (xj,v ar α2 (X i )) α 1 V ar u,xj +c j (X + c)du F (x j, V ar α2 (X i )) α 1 F (xj,v ar α2 (X i )) α 1 V ar u,xj (X) + c i du F (x j, V ar α2 (X i )) α 1 F (xj,v ar α2 (X i )) α 1 V ar u,xj (X)du + c i F (x j, V ar α2 (X i )) α 1 =RV ar α1,α 2,x j (X) + c i.
52 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 43 For Positive Homogeneity, RV ar α1,α 2,c j x j (cx) = = = c i F (xj,v ar α2 (X i )) α 1 V ar u,cj x j (cx)du F (x j, V ar α2 (X i )) α 1 F (xj,v ar α2 (X i )) α 1 c i V ar u,xj (X)du F (x j, V ar α2 (X i )) α 1 F (xj,v ar α2 (X i )) α 1 V ar u,xj (X)du F (x j, V ar α2 (X i )) α 1 =c i RV ar α1,α 2,x j (X). Using the same way, we could get similar results for upper orthant RVaR. Moreover, if X co X, then V ar α,xi (X ) V ar α,xi (X). According to the Denition 3.3.1, we have RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X) = E[X j V ar α1,x i (X) X j V ar α2 (X j ), X i x i ], RV ar α1,α 2,x (X) = E[X i j V ar α1,x (X ) X i j V ar α2 (X j), X i x i], and X, X have same marginal cdfs. Hence, the expectation over the interval [α 1, α 2 ] will following the same pattern, say RV ar α1,α 2 (X ) RV ar α1,α 2 (X). Also, since F x (X) = 1 F (X 1 ) F (X 2 ) + F x (X), F x (X ) = 1 F (X 1 ) F (X 2 ) + F x (X ), then F x (X) F x (X ). Thus, V ar α,xi (X) V ar α,xi (X ). Again, for the same reason, we can conclude that RV ar α1,α 2 (X) RV ar α1,α 2 (X ).
53 3. Multivariate Risk Measures 44 Consider the random vectors X M, X W and X Π which denote the monotonic, inverse monotonic and independent vector, respectively. They have following relationship X W co X Π co X M, which means according to the Proposition 3.5.1, we have RV ar α1,α 2 (X M ) RV ar α1,α 2 (X Π ) RV ar α1,α 2 (X W ), and RV ar α1,α 2 (X W ) RV ar α1,α 2 (X Π ) RV ar α1,α 2 (X M ). Example Consider a bivariate random vector (X 1, X 2 ) which is either comonotonic, counter-conomotonic or independent. We obtain the lower orthant RVaR based on the Proposition For i, j = 1, 2 (i j), α2 F Xi (x i ) 1 RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X Π ) = V ar u α 2 F Xi (x i ) α (X F 1 α Xi (x i j)du, ) 1 1 FXi (x i ) RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X M ) = V ar u (X j )du, F Xi (x i ) α 1 α 1 and 1 FXi (x i )+α 2 1 RV ar α1,α 2,x i (X W ) = V ar u FXi (x F Xi (x i ) + α 2 1 α i )+1(X j )du. 1 If the random vector above is dened with exponential marginal cdfs, i.e. X i Exp(λ i ), then we get the following results. α 1
Lecture Quantitative Finance Spring Term 2015
on bivariate Lecture Quantitative Finance Spring Term 2015 Prof. Dr. Erich Walter Farkas Lecture 07: April 2, 2015 1 / 54 Outline on bivariate 1 2 bivariate 3 Distribution 4 5 6 7 8 Comments and conclusions
More informationVaR vs. Expected Shortfall
VaR vs. Expected Shortfall Risk Measures under Solvency II Dietmar Pfeifer (2004) Risk measures and premium principles a comparison VaR vs. Expected Shortfall Dependence and its implications for risk measures
More informationModelling Dependence with Copulas and Applications to Risk Management. Filip Lindskog, RiskLab, ETH Zürich
Modelling Dependence with Copulas and Applications to Risk Management Filip Lindskog, RiskLab, ETH Zürich 02-07-2000 Home page: http://www.math.ethz.ch/ lindskog E-mail: lindskog@math.ethz.ch RiskLab:
More informationA proposal of a bivariate Conditional Tail Expectation
A proposal of a bivariate Conditional Tail Expectation Elena Di Bernardino a joint works with Areski Cousin b, Thomas Laloë c, Véronique Maume-Deschamps d and Clémentine Prieur e a, b, d Université Lyon
More informationFinancial Econometrics and Volatility Models Copulas
Financial Econometrics and Volatility Models Copulas Eric Zivot Updated: May 10, 2010 Reading MFTS, chapter 19 FMUND, chapters 6 and 7 Introduction Capturing co-movement between financial asset returns
More informationRegularly Varying Asymptotics for Tail Risk
Regularly Varying Asymptotics for Tail Risk Haijun Li Department of Mathematics Washington State University Humboldt Univ-Berlin Haijun Li Regularly Varying Asymptotics for Tail Risk Humboldt Univ-Berlin
More informationModelling Dependent Credit Risks
Modelling Dependent Credit Risks Filip Lindskog, RiskLab, ETH Zürich 30 November 2000 Home page:http://www.math.ethz.ch/ lindskog E-mail:lindskog@math.ethz.ch RiskLab:http://www.risklab.ch Modelling Dependent
More informationIntroduction to Dependence Modelling
Introduction to Dependence Modelling Carole Bernard Berlin, May 2015. 1 Outline Modeling Dependence Part 1: Introduction 1 General concepts on dependence. 2 in 2 or N 3 dimensions. 3 Minimizing the expectation
More informationRisk Aggregation with Dependence Uncertainty
Introduction Extreme Scenarios Asymptotic Behavior Challenges Risk Aggregation with Dependence Uncertainty Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science University of Waterloo, Canada Seminar at ETH Zurich
More informationOn the Conditional Value at Risk (CoVaR) from the copula perspective
On the Conditional Value at Risk (CoVaR) from the copula perspective Piotr Jaworski Institute of Mathematics, Warsaw University, Poland email: P.Jaworski@mimuw.edu.pl 1 Overview 1. Basics about VaR, CoVaR
More informationOn tail dependence coecients of transformed multivariate Archimedean copulas
Tails and for Archim Copula () February 2015, University of Lille 3 On tail dependence coecients of transformed multivariate Archimedean copulas Elena Di Bernardino, CNAM, Paris, Département IMATH Séminaire
More informationCONTAGION VERSUS FLIGHT TO QUALITY IN FINANCIAL MARKETS
EVA IV, CONTAGION VERSUS FLIGHT TO QUALITY IN FINANCIAL MARKETS Jose Olmo Department of Economics City University, London (joint work with Jesús Gonzalo, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid) 4th Conference
More informationGeneralized quantiles as risk measures
Generalized quantiles as risk measures Bellini, Klar, Muller, Rosazza Gianin December 1, 2014 Vorisek Jan Introduction Quantiles q α of a random variable X can be defined as the minimizers of a piecewise
More informationOn the coherence of Expected Shortfall
On the coherence of Expected Shortfall Carlo Acerbi Dirk Tasche First version: March 31, 2001 This update: September 12, 2001 Abstract Expected Shortfall (ES) in several variants has been proposed as remedy
More informationVaR bounds in models with partial dependence information on subgroups
VaR bounds in models with partial dependence information on subgroups L. Rüschendorf J. Witting February 23, 2017 Abstract We derive improved estimates for the model risk of risk portfolios when additional
More informationMultivariate Distribution Models
Multivariate Distribution Models Model Description While the probability distribution for an individual random variable is called marginal, the probability distribution for multiple random variables is
More informationCopulas and Measures of Dependence
1 Copulas and Measures of Dependence Uttara Naik-Nimbalkar December 28, 2014 Measures for determining the relationship between two variables: the Pearson s correlation coefficient, Kendalls tau and Spearmans
More informationCVaR and Examples of Deviation Risk Measures
CVaR and Examples of Deviation Risk Measures Jakub Černý Department of Probability and Mathematical Statistics Stochastic Modelling in Economics and Finance November 10, 2014 1 / 25 Contents CVaR - Dual
More informationExplicit Bounds for the Distribution Function of the Sum of Dependent Normally Distributed Random Variables
Explicit Bounds for the Distribution Function of the Sum of Dependent Normally Distributed Random Variables Walter Schneider July 26, 20 Abstract In this paper an analytic expression is given for the bounds
More informationMULTIVARIATE EXTREME VALUE ANALYSIS UNDER A
MULTIVARIATE EXTREME VALUE ANALYSIS UNDER A DIRECTIONAL APPROACH Raúl A. TORRES CNAM Paris Department of Statistics Universidad Carlos III de Madrid December 2015 Torres Díaz, Raúl A. Directional Extreme
More informationMultivariate comonotonicity, stochastic orders and risk measures
Multivariate comonotonicity, stochastic orders and risk measures Alfred Galichon (Ecole polytechnique) Brussels, May 25, 2012 Based on collaborations with: A. Charpentier (Rennes) G. Carlier (Dauphine)
More informationCopulas and dependence measurement
Copulas and dependence measurement Thorsten Schmidt. Chemnitz University of Technology, Mathematical Institute, Reichenhainer Str. 41, Chemnitz. thorsten.schmidt@mathematik.tu-chemnitz.de Keywords: copulas,
More informationRisk Aggregation and Model Uncertainty
Risk Aggregation and Model Uncertainty Paul Embrechts RiskLab, Department of Mathematics, ETH Zurich Senior SFI Professor www.math.ethz.ch/ embrechts/ Joint work with A. Beleraj, G. Puccetti and L. Rüschendorf
More informationNon parametric estimation of Archimedean copulas and tail dependence. Paris, february 19, 2015.
Non parametric estimation of Archimedean copulas and tail dependence Elena Di Bernardino a and Didier Rullière b Paris, february 19, 2015. a CNAM, Paris, Département IMATH, b ISFA, Université Lyon 1, Laboratoire
More informationMultivariate Stress Testing for Solvency
Multivariate Stress Testing for Solvency Alexander J. McNeil 1 1 Heriot-Watt University Edinburgh Vienna April 2012 a.j.mcneil@hw.ac.uk AJM Stress Testing 1 / 50 Regulation General Definition of Stress
More informationMultivariate Stress Scenarios and Solvency
Multivariate Stress Scenarios and Solvency Alexander J. McNeil 1 1 Heriot-Watt University Edinburgh Croatian Quants Day Zagreb 11th May 2012 a.j.mcneil@hw.ac.uk AJM Stress Testing 1 / 51 Regulation General
More informationGeneralized quantiles as risk measures
Generalized quantiles as risk measures F. Bellini 1, B. Klar 2, A. Müller 3, E. Rosazza Gianin 1 1 Dipartimento di Statistica e Metodi Quantitativi, Università di Milano Bicocca 2 Institut für Stochastik,
More informationClearly, if F is strictly increasing it has a single quasi-inverse, which equals the (ordinary) inverse function F 1 (or, sometimes, F 1 ).
APPENDIX A SIMLATION OF COPLAS Copulas have primary and direct applications in the simulation of dependent variables. We now present general procedures to simulate bivariate, as well as multivariate, dependent
More informationExpected Shortfall is not elicitable so what?
Expected Shortfall is not elicitable so what? Dirk Tasche Bank of England Prudential Regulation Authority 1 dirk.tasche@gmx.net Modern Risk Management of Insurance Firms Hannover, January 23, 2014 1 The
More informationMultivariate Measures of Positive Dependence
Int. J. Contemp. Math. Sciences, Vol. 4, 2009, no. 4, 191-200 Multivariate Measures of Positive Dependence Marta Cardin Department of Applied Mathematics University of Venice, Italy mcardin@unive.it Abstract
More informationExpected Shortfall is not elicitable so what?
Expected Shortfall is not elicitable so what? Dirk Tasche Bank of England Prudential Regulation Authority 1 dirk.tasche@gmx.net Finance & Stochastics seminar Imperial College, November 20, 2013 1 The opinions
More informationA Brief Introduction to Copulas
A Brief Introduction to Copulas Speaker: Hua, Lei February 24, 2009 Department of Statistics University of British Columbia Outline Introduction Definition Properties Archimedean Copulas Constructing Copulas
More informationEstimation of multivariate critical layers: Applications to rainfall data
Elena Di Bernardino, ICRA 6 / RISK 2015 () Estimation of Multivariate critical layers Barcelona, May 26-29, 2015 Estimation of multivariate critical layers: Applications to rainfall data Elena Di Bernardino,
More informationX
Correlation: Pitfalls and Alternatives Paul Embrechts, Alexander McNeil & Daniel Straumann Departement Mathematik, ETH Zentrum, CH-8092 Zürich Tel: +41 1 632 61 62, Fax: +41 1 632 15 23 embrechts/mcneil/strauman@math.ethz.ch
More informationCopulas. MOU Lili. December, 2014
Copulas MOU Lili December, 2014 Outline Preliminary Introduction Formal Definition Copula Functions Estimating the Parameters Example Conclusion and Discussion Preliminary MOU Lili SEKE Team 3/30 Probability
More informationAn Academic Response to Basel 3.5
An Academic Response to Basel 3.5 Risk Aggregation and Model Uncertainty Paul Embrechts RiskLab, Department of Mathematics, ETH Zurich Senior SFI Professor www.math.ethz.ch/ embrechts/ Joint work with
More informationNonlife Actuarial Models. Chapter 4 Risk Measures
Nonlife Actuarial Models Chapter 4 Risk Measures Learning Objectives 1. Risk measures based on premium principles 2. Risk measures based on capital requirements 3. Value-at-Risk and conditional tail expectation
More informationRisk bounds with additional structural and dependence information
Risk with additional structural dependence information Ludger Rüschendorf University of Freiburg Montreal,September 2017 VaR,higher Variance stard c Rüschendorf, Uni Freiburg; 1 1. VaR with marginal information
More informationA simple graphical method to explore tail-dependence in stock-return pairs
A simple graphical method to explore tail-dependence in stock-return pairs Klaus Abberger, University of Konstanz, Germany Abstract: For a bivariate data set the dependence structure can not only be measured
More informationEXTREMAL DEPENDENCE OF MULTIVARIATE DISTRIBUTIONS AND ITS APPLICATIONS YANNAN SUN
EXTREMAL DEPENDENCE OF MULTIVARIATE DISTRIBUTIONS AND ITS APPLICATIONS By YANNAN SUN A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY WASHINGTON
More informationCopulas. Mathematisches Seminar (Prof. Dr. D. Filipovic) Di Uhr in E
Copulas Mathematisches Seminar (Prof. Dr. D. Filipovic) Di. 14-16 Uhr in E41 A Short Introduction 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 The above picture shows a scatterplot (500 points) from a pair
More informationContents 1. Coping with Copulas. Thorsten Schmidt 1. Department of Mathematics, University of Leipzig Dec 2006
Contents 1 Coping with Copulas Thorsten Schmidt 1 Department of Mathematics, University of Leipzig Dec 2006 Forthcoming in Risk Books Copulas - From Theory to Applications in Finance Contents 1 Introdcution
More informationLifetime Dependence Modelling using a Generalized Multivariate Pareto Distribution
Lifetime Dependence Modelling using a Generalized Multivariate Pareto Distribution Daniel Alai Zinoviy Landsman Centre of Excellence in Population Ageing Research (CEPAR) School of Mathematics, Statistics
More informationBuered Probability of Exceedance: Mathematical Properties and Optimization
Buered Probability of Exceedance: Mathematical Properties and Optimization Alexander Mafusalov, Stan Uryasev RESEARCH REPORT 2014-1 Risk Management and Financial Engineering Lab Department of Industrial
More informationAggregation-Robustness and Model Uncertainty of Regulatory Risk Measures
Aggregation-Robustness and Model Uncertainty of Regulatory Risk Measures Paul Embrechts, Bin Wang and Ruodu Wang February 10, 2014 Abstract Research related to aggregation, robustness, and model uncertainty
More informationConditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) Norm: Stochastic Case
Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) Norm: Stochastic Case Alexander Mafusalov, Stan Uryasev RESEARCH REPORT 03-5 Risk Management and Financial Engineering Lab Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering
More informationSimulating Exchangeable Multivariate Archimedean Copulas and its Applications. Authors: Florence Wu Emiliano A. Valdez Michael Sherris
Simulating Exchangeable Multivariate Archimedean Copulas and its Applications Authors: Florence Wu Emiliano A. Valdez Michael Sherris Literatures Frees and Valdez (1999) Understanding Relationships Using
More informationStochastic dominance with imprecise information
Stochastic dominance with imprecise information Ignacio Montes, Enrique Miranda, Susana Montes University of Oviedo, Dep. of Statistics and Operations Research. Abstract Stochastic dominance, which is
More informationMULTIVARIATE EXTENSIONS OF RISK MEASURES
MULTIVARIATE EXTENSIONS OF EXPECTILES RISK MEASURES Véronique Maume-Deschamps, Didier Rullière, Khalil Said To cite this version: Véronique Maume-Deschamps, Didier Rullière, Khalil Said. EXPECTILES RISK
More informationRisk Aggregation. Paul Embrechts. Department of Mathematics, ETH Zurich Senior SFI Professor.
Risk Aggregation Paul Embrechts Department of Mathematics, ETH Zurich Senior SFI Professor www.math.ethz.ch/~embrechts/ Joint work with P. Arbenz and G. Puccetti 1 / 33 The background Query by practitioner
More informationRisk Aggregation with Dependence Uncertainty
Risk Aggregation with Dependence Uncertainty Carole Bernard, Xiao Jiang and Ruodu Wang November 213 Abstract Risk aggregation with dependence uncertainty refers to the sum of individual risks with known
More informationProbability Distribution And Density For Functional Random Variables
Probability Distribution And Density For Functional Random Variables E. Cuvelier 1 M. Noirhomme-Fraiture 1 1 Institut d Informatique Facultés Universitaires Notre-Dame de la paix Namur CIL Research Contact
More informationSolutions of the Financial Risk Management Examination
Solutions of the Financial Risk Management Examination Thierry Roncalli January 9 th 03 Remark The first five questions are corrected in TR-GDR and in the document of exercise solutions, which is available
More informationMultivariate Operational Risk: Dependence Modelling with Lévy Copulas
Multivariate Operational Risk: Dependence Modelling with Lévy Copulas Klaus Böcker Claudia Klüppelberg Abstract Simultaneous modelling of operational risks occurring in different event type/business line
More informationMultivariate extensions of expectiles risk measures
Depend. Model. 2017; 5:20 44 Research Article Special Issue: Recent Developments in Quantitative Risk Management Open Access Véronique Maume-Deschamps*, Didier Rullière, and Khalil Said Multivariate extensions
More informationCoherent Risk Measures. Acceptance Sets. L = {X G : X(ω) < 0, ω Ω}.
So far in this course we have used several different mathematical expressions to quantify risk, without a deeper discussion of their properties. Coherent Risk Measures Lecture 11, Optimisation in Finance
More informationGENERAL MULTIVARIATE DEPENDENCE USING ASSOCIATED COPULAS
REVSTAT Statistical Journal Volume 14, Number 1, February 2016, 1 28 GENERAL MULTIVARIATE DEPENDENCE USING ASSOCIATED COPULAS Author: Yuri Salazar Flores Centre for Financial Risk, Macquarie University,
More informationModeling of Dependence Structures in Risk Management and Solvency
Moeling of Depenence Structures in Risk Management an Solvency University of California, Santa Barbara 0. August 007 Doreen Straßburger Structure. Risk Measurement uner Solvency II. Copulas 3. Depenent
More informationRisk Aversion and Coherent Risk Measures: a Spectral Representation Theorem
Risk Aversion and Coherent Risk Measures: a Spectral Representation Theorem Carlo Acerbi Abaxbank, Corso Monforte 34, 2122 Milano (Italy) July 1, 21 Abstract We study a space of coherent risk measures
More informationOverview of Extreme Value Theory. Dr. Sawsan Hilal space
Overview of Extreme Value Theory Dr. Sawsan Hilal space Maths Department - University of Bahrain space November 2010 Outline Part-1: Univariate Extremes Motivation Threshold Exceedances Part-2: Bivariate
More informationAsymptotic Bounds for the Distribution of the Sum of Dependent Random Variables
Asymptotic Bounds for the Distribution of the Sum of Dependent Random Variables Ruodu Wang November 26, 2013 Abstract Suppose X 1,, X n are random variables with the same known marginal distribution F
More informationCopula methods in Finance
Wolfgang K. Härdle Ostap Okhrin Ladislaus von Bortkiewicz Chair of Statistics C.A.S.E. Center for Applied Statistics and Economics Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin http://ise.wiwi.hu-berlin.de Motivation
More informationSHORTFALL DEVIATION RISK. Marcelo Brutti Righi Paulo Sergio Ceretta. Abstract
1 SHORTFALL DEVIATION RISK Marcelo Brutti Righi Paulo Sergio Ceretta Abstract We present the Shortfall Deviation Risk (SDR), a risk measure that represents the expected loss that occur with certain probability
More informationPolitecnico di Torino. Porto Institutional Repository
Politecnico di Torino Porto Institutional Repository [Article] On preservation of ageing under minimum for dependent random lifetimes Original Citation: Pellerey F.; Zalzadeh S. (204). On preservation
More informationA Measure of Monotonicity of Two Random Variables
Journal of Mathematics and Statistics 8 (): -8, 0 ISSN 549-3644 0 Science Publications A Measure of Monotonicity of Two Random Variables Farida Kachapova and Ilias Kachapov School of Computing and Mathematical
More informationStatistical analysis of empirical pairwise copulas for the S&P 500 stocks
Statistical analysis of empirical pairwise copulas for the S&P 500 stocks Richard Koivusalo Supervisor KTH : Tatjana Pavlenko July 2012 Abstract It is of great importance to find an analytical copula that
More informationA Theory for Measures of Tail Risk
A Theory for Measures of Tail Risk Ruodu Wang http://sas.uwaterloo.ca/~wang Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science University of Waterloo, Canada Extreme Value Analysis Conference 2017 TU Delft
More informationAssessing financial model risk
Assessing financial model risk and an application to electricity prices Giacomo Scandolo University of Florence giacomo.scandolo@unifi.it joint works with Pauline Barrieu (LSE) and Angelica Gianfreda (LBS)
More informationAggregate Risk. MFM Practitioner Module: Quantitative Risk Management. John Dodson. February 6, Aggregate Risk. John Dodson.
MFM Practitioner Module: Quantitative Risk Management February 6, 2019 As we discussed last semester, the general goal of risk measurement is to come up with a single metric that can be used to make financial
More informationTwo hours. To be supplied by the Examinations Office: Mathematical Formula Tables and Statistical Tables THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER.
Two hours MATH38181 To be supplied by the Examinations Office: Mathematical Formula Tables and Statistical Tables THE UNIVERSITY OF MANCHESTER EXTREME VALUES AND FINANCIAL RISK Examiner: Answer any FOUR
More informationBregman superquantiles. Estimation methods and applications
Bregman superquantiles. Estimation methods and applications Institut de mathématiques de Toulouse 2 juin 2014 Joint work with F. Gamboa, A. Garivier (IMT) and B. Iooss (EDF R&D). 1 Coherent measure of
More informationStochastic Optimization with Risk Measures
Stochastic Optimization with Risk Measures IMA New Directions Short Course on Mathematical Optimization Jim Luedtke Department of Industrial and Systems Engineering University of Wisconsin-Madison August
More informationConvexity of chance constraints with dependent random variables: the use of copulae
Convexity of chance constraints with dependent random variables: the use of copulae René Henrion 1 and Cyrille Strugarek 2 1 Weierstrass Institute for Applied Analysis and Stochastics, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
More informationTail Mutual Exclusivity and Tail- Var Lower Bounds
Tail Mutual Exclusivity and Tail- Var Lower Bounds Ka Chun Cheung, Michel Denuit, Jan Dhaene AFI_15100 TAIL MUTUAL EXCLUSIVITY AND TAIL-VAR LOWER BOUNDS KA CHUN CHEUNG Department of Statistics and Actuarial
More informationCompetitive Equilibria in a Comonotone Market
Competitive Equilibria in a Comonotone Market 1/51 Competitive Equilibria in a Comonotone Market Ruodu Wang http://sas.uwaterloo.ca/ wang Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science University of Waterloo
More informationSum of Two Standard Uniform Random Variables
Sum of Two Standard Uniform Random Variables Ruodu Wang http://sas.uwaterloo.ca/~wang Department of Statistics and Actuarial Science University of Waterloo, Canada Dependence Modeling in Finance, Insurance
More informationTail negative dependence and its applications for aggregate loss modeling
Tail negative dependence and its applications for aggregate loss modeling Lei Hua Division of Statistics Oct 20, 2014, ISU L. Hua (NIU) 1/35 1 Motivation 2 Tail order Elliptical copula Extreme value copula
More informationRISK AND RELIABILITY IN OPTIMIZATION UNDER UNCERTAINTY
RISK AND RELIABILITY IN OPTIMIZATION UNDER UNCERTAINTY Terry Rockafellar University of Washington, Seattle AMSI Optimise Melbourne, Australia 18 Jun 2018 Decisions in the Face of Uncertain Outcomes = especially
More informationThe Instability of Correlations: Measurement and the Implications for Market Risk
The Instability of Correlations: Measurement and the Implications for Market Risk Prof. Massimo Guidolin 20254 Advanced Quantitative Methods for Asset Pricing and Structuring Winter/Spring 2018 Threshold
More informationON UNIFORM TAIL EXPANSIONS OF BIVARIATE COPULAS
APPLICATIONES MATHEMATICAE 31,4 2004), pp. 397 415 Piotr Jaworski Warszawa) ON UNIFORM TAIL EXPANSIONS OF BIVARIATE COPULAS Abstract. The theory of copulas provides a useful tool for modelling dependence
More informationOptimal Reinsurance Strategy with Bivariate Pareto Risks
University of Wisconsin Milwaukee UWM Digital Commons Theses and Dissertations May 2014 Optimal Reinsurance Strategy with Bivariate Pareto Risks Evelyn Susanne Gaus University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee Follow
More informationElicitability and backtesting
Elicitability and backtesting Johanna F. Ziegel University of Bern joint work with Natalia Nolde, UBC 17 November 2017 Research Seminar at the Institute for Statistics and Mathematics, WU Vienna 1 / 32
More informationLecture 2 One too many inequalities
University of Illinois Department of Economics Spring 2017 Econ 574 Roger Koenker Lecture 2 One too many inequalities In lecture 1 we introduced some of the basic conceptual building materials of the course.
More informationDependence. Practitioner Course: Portfolio Optimization. John Dodson. September 10, Dependence. John Dodson. Outline.
Practitioner Course: Portfolio Optimization September 10, 2008 Before we define dependence, it is useful to define Random variables X and Y are independent iff For all x, y. In particular, F (X,Y ) (x,
More informationAsymptotic behaviour of multivariate default probabilities and default correlations under stress
Asymptotic behaviour of multivariate default probabilities and default correlations under stress 7th General AMaMeF and Swissquote Conference EPFL, Lausanne Natalie Packham joint with Michael Kalkbrener
More informationMultivariate survival modelling: a unified approach with copulas
Multivariate survival modelling: a unified approach with copulas P. Georges, A-G. Lamy, E. Nicolas, G. Quibel & T. Roncalli Groupe de Recherche Opérationnelle Crédit Lyonnais France May 28, 2001 Abstract
More informationRobustness of data-driven CVaR optimization using smoothing technique
Robustness of data-driven CVaR optimization using smoothing technique by Johnny Chow Aresearchpaper presented to the University of Waterloo in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of Master
More informationAsymptotic Analysis for Spectral Risk Measures Parameterized by Confidence Level
Asymptotic Analysis for Spectral Risk Measures Parameterized by Confidence Level arxiv:1711.7335v1 [q-fin.rm] 2 Nov 217 Takashi Kato Association of Mathematical Finance Laboratory (AMFiL) 2 1, Kojimachi,
More informationJan Kallsen. Risk Management Lecture Notes
Jan Kallsen Risk Management Lecture Notes CAU zu Kiel, WS 6/7, as of January 2, 207 Contents Introduction 5. Motivation and issues............................. 5.. Motivation..............................
More informationIntroduction to Algorithmic Trading Strategies Lecture 10
Introduction to Algorithmic Trading Strategies Lecture 10 Risk Management Haksun Li haksun.li@numericalmethod.com www.numericalmethod.com Outline Value at Risk (VaR) Extreme Value Theory (EVT) References
More informationAsymptotic distribution of the sample average value-at-risk
Asymptotic distribution of the sample average value-at-risk Stoyan V. Stoyanov Svetlozar T. Rachev September 3, 7 Abstract In this paper, we prove a result for the asymptotic distribution of the sample
More informationUsing copulas to model time dependence in stochastic frontier models
Using copulas to model time dependence in stochastic frontier models Christine Amsler Michigan State University Artem Prokhorov Concordia University November 2008 Peter Schmidt Michigan State University
More informationRewrap ECON November 18, () Rewrap ECON 4135 November 18, / 35
Rewrap ECON 4135 November 18, 2011 () Rewrap ECON 4135 November 18, 2011 1 / 35 What should you now know? 1 What is econometrics? 2 Fundamental regression analysis 1 Bivariate regression 2 Multivariate
More informationBounds on the value-at-risk for the sum of possibly dependent risks
Insurance: Mathematics and Economics 37 (2005) 135 151 Bounds on the value-at-risk for the sum of possibly dependent risks Mhamed Mesfioui, Jean-François Quessy Département de Mathématiques et d informatique,
More informationTail Approximation of Value-at-Risk under Multivariate Regular Variation
Tail Approximation of Value-at-Risk under Multivariate Regular Variation Yannan Sun Haijun Li July 00 Abstract This paper presents a general tail approximation method for evaluating the Valueat-Risk of
More informationSolution of the Financial Risk Management Examination
Solution of the Financial Risk Management Examination Thierry Roncalli January 8 th 014 Remark 1 The first five questions are corrected in TR-GDR 1 and in the document of exercise solutions, which is available
More informationModern Portfolio Theory with Homogeneous Risk Measures
Modern Portfolio Theory with Homogeneous Risk Measures Dirk Tasche Zentrum Mathematik Technische Universität München http://www.ma.tum.de/stat/ Rotterdam February 8, 2001 Abstract The Modern Portfolio
More informationSharp bounds on the VaR for sums of dependent risks
Paul Embrechts Sharp bounds on the VaR for sums of dependent risks joint work with Giovanni Puccetti (university of Firenze, Italy) and Ludger Rüschendorf (university of Freiburg, Germany) Mathematical
More informationDecision principles derived from risk measures
Decision principles derived from risk measures Marc Goovaerts Marc.Goovaerts@econ.kuleuven.ac.be Katholieke Universiteit Leuven Decision principles derived from risk measures - Marc Goovaerts p. 1/17 Back
More informationOperational Risk and Pareto Lévy Copulas
Operational Risk and Pareto Lévy Copulas Claudia Klüppelberg Technische Universität München email: cklu@ma.tum.de http://www-m4.ma.tum.de References: - Böcker, K. and Klüppelberg, C. (25) Operational VaR
More information