IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jbfina/v91y2018icp133-145.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Unbiased estimation of risk

Author

Listed:
  • Pitera, Marcin
  • Schmidt, Thorsten

Abstract

The estimation of risk measures recently gained a lot of attention, partly because of the backtesting issues of expected shortfall related to elicitability. In this work we shed a new and fundamental light on optimal estimation procedures of risk measures in terms of bias. We show that once the parameters of a model need to be estimated, one has to take additional care when estimating risks. The typical plug-in approach, for example, introduces a bias which leads to a systematic underestimation of risk.

Suggested Citation

  • Pitera, Marcin & Schmidt, Thorsten, 2018. "Unbiased estimation of risk," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 133-145.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jbfina:v:91:y:2018:i:c:p:133-145
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.04.016
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037842661830089X
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.04.016?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Natalia Nolde & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Elicitability and backtesting: Perspectives for banking regulation," Papers 1608.05498, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2017.
    2. Gneiting, Tilmann, 2011. "Making and Evaluating Point Forecasts," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 106(494), pages 746-762.
    3. Jeremy Berkowitz & James O'Brien, 2002. "How Accurate Are Value‐at‐Risk Models at Commercial Banks?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 57(3), pages 1093-1111, June.
    4. So, Mike K.P. & Yu, Philip L.H., 2006. "Empirical analysis of GARCH models in value at risk estimation," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 180-197, April.
    5. Pierre Giot & Sébastien Laurent, 2003. "Value-at-risk for long and short trading positions," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 18(6), pages 641-663.
    6. Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Coherence And Elicitability," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 26(4), pages 901-918, October.
    7. Osband, Kent & Reichelstein, Stefan, 1985. "Information-eliciting compensation schemes," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 107-115, June.
    8. M. Kaina & L. Rüschendorf, 2009. "On convex risk measures on L p -spaces," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 69(3), pages 475-495, July.
    9. Yamai, Yasuhiro & Yoshiba, Toshinao, 2005. "Value-at-risk versus expected shortfall: A practical perspective," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 997-1015, April.
    10. Diebold, Francis X & Mariano, Roberto S, 2002. "Comparing Predictive Accuracy," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 20(1), pages 134-144, January.
    11. Hans Föllmer & Thomas Knispel, 2013. "Convex risk measures: Basic facts, law-invariance and beyond, asymptotics for large portfolios," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part II, chapter 30, pages 507-554, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    12. Carlo Acerbi, 2007. "Coherent measures of risk in everyday market practice," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(4), pages 359-364.
    13. Rama Cont & Romain Deguest & Giacomo Scandolo, 2010. "Robustness and sensitivity analysis of risk measurement procedures," Post-Print hal-00413729, HAL.
    14. Kellner, Ralf & Rösch, Daniel, 2016. "Quantifying market risk with Value-at-Risk or Expected Shortfall? – Consequences for capital requirements and model risk," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 68(C), pages 45-63.
    15. Rama Cont & Romain Deguest & Giacomo Scandolo, 2010. "Robustness and sensitivity analysis of risk measurement procedures," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(6), pages 593-606.
    16. Rama Cont & Romain Deguest & Xuedong He, 2011. "Loss-Based Risk Measures," Papers 1110.1436, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2013.
    17. Steven Kou & Xianhua Peng & Chris C. Heyde, 2013. "External Risk Measures and Basel Accords," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 38(3), pages 393-417, August.
    18. Ivo Francioni & Florian Herzog, 2012. "Probability-unbiased Value-at-Risk estimators," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(5), pages 755-768, November.
    19. Stefan Weber, 2006. "Distribution‐Invariant Risk Measures, Information, And Dynamic Consistency," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 16(2), pages 419-441, April.
    20. Tobias Fissler & Johanna F. Ziegel & Tilmann Gneiting, 2015. "Expected Shortfall is jointly elicitable with Value at Risk - Implications for backtesting," Papers 1507.00244, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2015.
    21. Susanne Emmer & Marie Kratz & Dirk Tasche, 2013. "What is the best risk measure in practice? A comparison of standard measures," Papers 1312.1645, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2015.
    22. Hajo Holzmann & Matthias Eulert, 2014. "The role of the information set for forecasting - with applications to risk management," Papers 1404.7653, arXiv.org.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Pedro M. Mirete-Ferrer & Alberto Garcia-Garcia & Juan Samuel Baixauli-Soler & Maria A. Prats, 2022. "A Review on Machine Learning for Asset Management," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-46, April.
    2. Barbagli, Matteo & Vrins, Frédéric, 2023. "Accounting for PD-LGD dependency: A tractable extension to the Basel ASRF framework," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    3. Daniel Bartl & Ludovic Tangpi, 2020. "Non-asymptotic convergence rates for the plug-in estimation of risk measures," Papers 2003.10479, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2022.
    4. Weronika Ormaniec & Marcin Pitera & Sajad Safarveisi & Thorsten Schmidt, 2022. "Estimating value at risk: LSTM vs. GARCH," Papers 2207.10539, arXiv.org.
    5. Bielecki Tomasz R. & Cialenco Igor & Pitera Marcin & Schmidt Thorsten, 2020. "Fair estimation of capital risk allocation," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 37(1-2), pages 1-24, January.
    6. Ning Zhang & Yujing Gong & Xiaohan Xue, 2023. "Less disagreement, better forecasts: Adjusted risk measures in the energy futures market," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(10), pages 1332-1372, October.
    7. Tomasz R. Bielecki & Igor Cialenco & Marcin Pitera & Thorsten Schmidt, 2019. "Fair Estimation of Capital Risk Allocation," Papers 1902.10044, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2019.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fissler Tobias & Ziegel Johanna F., 2021. "On the elicitability of range value at risk," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 38(1-2), pages 25-46, January.
    2. Marcin Pitera & Thorsten Schmidt, 2016. "Unbiased estimation of risk," Papers 1603.02615, arXiv.org, revised Aug 2017.
    3. Tobias Fissler & Jana Hlavinová & Birgit Rudloff, 2021. "Elicitability and identifiability of set-valued measures of systemic risk," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 133-165, January.
    4. Del Brio, Esther B. & Mora-Valencia, Andrés & Perote, Javier, 2020. "Risk quantification for commodity ETFs: Backtesting value-at-risk and expected shortfall," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 70(C).
    5. Steven Kou & Xianhua Peng, 2016. "On the Measurement of Economic Tail Risk," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 64(5), pages 1056-1072, October.
    6. Righi, Marcelo Brutti & Müller, Fernanda Maria & Moresco, Marlon Ruoso, 2020. "On a robust risk measurement approach for capital determination errors minimization," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 199-211.
    7. Tobias Fissler & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2019. "Evaluating Range Value at Risk Forecasts," Papers 1902.04489, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    8. Tobias Fissler & Hajo Holzmann, 2022. "Measurability of functionals and of ideal point forecasts," Papers 2203.08635, arXiv.org.
    9. Natalia Nolde & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Elicitability and backtesting: Perspectives for banking regulation," Papers 1608.05498, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2017.
    10. Owusu Junior, Peterson & Alagidede, Imhotep, 2020. "Risks in emerging markets equities: Time-varying versus spatial risk analysis," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 542(C).
    11. Dimitriadis, Timo & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2021. "Forecast encompassing tests for the expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 604-621.
    12. Ruodu Wang & Yunran Wei, 2020. "Risk functionals with convex level sets," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1337-1367, October.
    13. James Ming Chen, 2018. "On Exactitude in Financial Regulation: Value-at-Risk, Expected Shortfall, and Expectiles," Risks, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-28, June.
    14. Sebastian Bayer & Timo Dimitriadis, 2022. "Regression-Based Expected Shortfall Backtesting [Backtesting Expected Shortfall]," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 20(3), pages 437-471.
    15. Tobias Fissler & Fangda Liu & Ruodu Wang & Linxiao Wei, 2024. "Elicitability and identifiability of tail risk measures," Papers 2404.14136, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    16. Müller, Fernanda Maria & Santos, Samuel Solgon & Gössling, Thalles Weber & Righi, Marcelo Brutti, 2022. "Comparison of risk forecasts for cryptocurrencies: A focus on Range Value at Risk," Finance Research Letters, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    17. Mucahit Aygun & Fabio Bellini & Roger J. A. Laeven, 2023. "Elicitability of Return Risk Measures," Papers 2302.13070, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    18. Marcelo Brutti Righi & Fernanda Maria Muller & Marlon Ruoso Moresco, 2022. "A risk measurement approach from risk-averse stochastic optimization of score functions," Papers 2208.14809, arXiv.org, revised May 2023.
    19. Nieto, Maria Rosa & Ruiz, Esther, 2016. "Frontiers in VaR forecasting and backtesting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 475-501.
    20. Ruodu Wang & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2014. "Distortion Risk Measures and Elicitability," Papers 1405.3769, arXiv.org, revised May 2014.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:jbfina:v:91:y:2018:i:c:p:133-145. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/jbf .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.