VaR Methodologies: The strengths and weaknesses of each method
This is the ninth article in the series
"Popular Risk management". The aim of the series is to describe the
main Risk management topics in a simple, but at the same time a clear and
concise language.
Global Risk Consult is your local partner of choice http://www.globalriskconsult.com
Please send your comments to: info@globalriskconsult.com
Written by Boris Agranovich
VaR Methodologies: The strengths and weaknesses of each method
VAR or Value at risk is a summary measure of downside risk expressed in the reference currency. A general definition is: VAR is the maximum expected loss over a given period at a given level of confidence. VaR does not inform on the size of loss that might occur beyond that confidence level.
The method used to calculate VaR may be historical simulation (either based on sensitivities or full revaluation), parametric, or Monte Carlo simulation. All methodologies share both a dependency on historic data, and a set of assumptions about the liquidity of the underlying positions and the continuous nature of underlying markets. In the wake of the current crisis the weaknesses of VAR methodology became apparent and they need to be addressed.
VaR Methodologies: comparative analysis
|
|
Historical Simulation |
Parametric |
Monte Carlo |
|
|
|
Sensitivities |
Full revaluation |
|
|
|
Accuracy |
Poor for non‑linear and/or complex products |
Good |
Poor (for non‑linear and/or complex products) |
Poor if based on sensitivities Excellent if based on full revaluation |
|
Treatment of Correlation |
As good as historic data |
As good as historic data |
Poor |
Flexible but complex |
|
Treatment of path dependant pay-offs |
No |
Depends on the implementation |
No |
Yes |
|
Treatment of illiquid positions |
ad‑hoc & poor |
ad-hoc & poor |
ad-hoc & poor |
ad-hoc & poor |
|
Implementation |
Efficient |
Slow to run |
Easy |
Difficult |
|
Potential for Stress testing |
Sometimes inaccurate and only as good as historic data |
Accurate but only as good as historic data |
Poor |
Flexible |
|
Transparency |
Good – VaR may be understood in terms of both sensitivities and market events on historic days |
Good |
Medium-Poor |
Medium-Poor |
Addressing the limitations
Where these limitations may cause a material inaccuracy of VaR results, additional measures should be taken including one or more of the following:
1. the prompt review & correction of time series data used as an input to the VaR Model,
2. a VaR Add-on using a methodology that addresses the weakness,
a) the implementation of an appropriate full revaluation stress test,
b) the implementation of full revaluation or an alternative VaR methodology at a portfolio level (e.g. Monte Carlo simulation)
c) Market risk limit monitoring.
A VAR system alone will not be effective in protecting against market risk. It needs to be used only in combination with limits both on notional amounts and exposures and, in addition, should be reinforced by vigorous stress tests.
Do you want to learn more about Risk management? Please click on the link below: Global Risk Consult is your local partner of choice http://www.globalriskconsult.com
Please send your comments to: info@globalriskconsult.com
Written by Boris Agranovich
In : Risk management
Tags: "var methodology" "market risk" "monte carlo simulation" "historic simulation" "parametric var"
blog comments powered by Disqus