IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/annfin/v9y2013i2p167-183.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Risk classes for structured products: mathematical aspects and their implications on behavioral investors

Author

Listed:
  • Ji Cao
  • Marc Rieger

Abstract

The new regulation of the EU for financial products (UCITS IV) prescribes Value at Risk (VaR) as the benchmark for assessing the risk of structured products. We discuss the limitations of this approach and show that, in theory, the expected return of structured products is unbounded while the VaR requirement for the lowest risk class can still be satisfied. Real-life examples of large returns within the lowest risk class are then provided. The results demonstrate that the new regulation could lead to new seemingly safe products that hide large risks. Behavioral investors that choose products only based on their official risk classes and their expected returns will, therefore, invest into suboptimal products. To overcome these limitations, we suggest a new risk-return measure for financial products based on the martingale measure that could erase such loopholes. Copyright Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Suggested Citation

  • Ji Cao & Marc Rieger, 2013. "Risk classes for structured products: mathematical aspects and their implications on behavioral investors," Annals of Finance, Springer, vol. 9(2), pages 167-183, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:kap:annfin:v:9:y:2013:i:2:p:167-183
    DOI: 10.1007/s10436-013-0223-8
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10436-013-0223-8
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10436-013-0223-8?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. Marc Rieger, 2011. "Co-monotonicity of optimal investments and the design of structured financial products," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 27-55, January.
    2. Alexander, Gordon J. & Baptista, Alexandre M., 2002. "Economic implications of using a mean-VaR model for portfolio selection: A comparison with mean-variance analysis," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 26(7-8), pages 1159-1193, July.
    3. Benati, Stefano, 2003. "The optimal portfolio problem with coherent risk measure constraints," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 150(3), pages 572-584, November.
    4. Jackwerth, Jens Carsten & Rubinstein, Mark, 1996. "Recovering Probability Distributions from Option Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 51(5), pages 1611-1632, December.
    5. Breuer, Wolfgang & Perst, Achim, 2007. "Retail banking and behavioral financial engineering: The case of structured products," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 827-844, March.
    6. Basak, Suleyman & Shapiro, Alexander, 2001. "Value-at-Risk-Based Risk Management: Optimal Policies and Asset Prices," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(2), pages 371-405.
    7. George M. Constantinides & Jens Carsten Jackwerth & Stylianos Perrakis, 2009. "Mispricing of S&P 500 Index Options," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(3), pages 1247-1277.
    8. Campbell, Rachel & Huisman, Ronald & Koedijk, Kees, 2001. "Optimal portfolio selection in a Value-at-Risk framework," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 25(9), pages 1789-1804, September.
    9. Philippe Artzner & Freddy Delbaen & Jean‐Marc Eber & David Heath, 1999. "Coherent Measures of Risk," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 203-228, July.
    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. Ji Cao, 2017. "How does the underlying affect the risk-return profiles of structured products?," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 31(1), pages 27-47, February.
    2. Shuonan Yuan & Marc Oliver Rieger, 2021. "Diversification with options and structured products," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 24(1), pages 55-77, April.
    3. Martin Ewen, 2018. "Where is the Risk Reward? The Impact of Volatility-Based Fund Classification on Performance," Risks, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-20, August.
    4. José Antonio Climent Hernández & Carolina Cruz Matú, 2017. "Pricing of a structured product on the SX5E when the uncertainty of returns is modeled as a log-stable process," Contaduría y Administración, Accounting and Management, vol. 62(4), pages 1160-1182, Octubre-D.
    5. H. Fink & S. Geissel & J. Sass & F. T. Seifried, 2019. "Implied risk aversion: an alternative rating system for retail structured products," Review of Derivatives Research, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 357-387, October.

    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. Ji Cao, 2017. "How does the underlying affect the risk-return profiles of structured products?," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 31(1), pages 27-47, February.
    2. Das, Sanjiv R. & Statman, Meir, 2013. "Options and structured products in behavioral portfolios," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 137-153.
    3. Xue Dong He & Hanqing Jin & Xun Yu Zhou, 2015. "Dynamic Portfolio Choice When Risk Is Measured by Weighted VaR," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 773-796, March.
    4. P. Kumar & Jyotirmayee Behera & A. K. Bhurjee, 2022. "Solving mean-VaR portfolio selection model with interval-typed random parameter using interval analysis," OPSEARCH, Springer;Operational Research Society of India, vol. 59(1), pages 41-77, March.
    5. Taras Bodnar & Wolfgang Schmid & Taras Zabolotskyy, 2013. "Asymptotic behavior of the estimated weights and of the estimated performance measures of the minimum VaR and the minimum CVaR optimal portfolios for dependent data," Metrika: International Journal for Theoretical and Applied Statistics, Springer, vol. 76(8), pages 1105-1134, November.
    6. Kaplanski, Guy, 2005. "Analytical Portfolio Value-at-Risk," MPRA Paper 80216, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Gordon J. Alexander & Alexandre M. Baptista, 2004. "A Comparison of VaR and CVaR Constraints on Portfolio Selection with the Mean-Variance Model," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(9), pages 1261-1273, September.
    8. Giovanni Bonaccolto & Massimiliano Caporin & Sandra Paterlini, 2018. "Asset allocation strategies based on penalized quantile regression," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 1-32, January.
    9. Alexander, Gordon J. & Baptista, Alexandre M. & Yan, Shu, 2014. "Bank regulation and international financial stability: A case against the 2006 Basel framework for controlling tail risk in trading books," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 43(C), pages 107-130.
    10. Gourieroux, C. & Monfort, A., 2005. "The econometrics of efficient portfolios," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 1-41, January.
    11. Huang, Jinbo & Ding, Ashley & Li, Yong & Lu, Dong, 2020. "Increasing the risk management effectiveness from higher accuracy: A novel non-parametric method," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    12. Jón Daníelsson & Jean-Pierre Zigrand, 2008. "Equilibrium asset pricing with systemic risk," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 35(2), pages 293-319, May.
    13. Tokat, Yesim & Rachev, Svetlozar T. & Schwartz, Eduardo, 2000. "The Stable non-Gaussian Asset Allocation: A Comparison with the Classical Gaussian Approach," University of California at Santa Barbara, Economics Working Paper Series qt9ph6b5gp, Department of Economics, UC Santa Barbara.
    14. Brandtner, Mario & Kürsten, Wolfgang & Rischau, Robert, 2018. "Entropic risk measures and their comparative statics in portfolio selection: Coherence vs. convexity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 264(2), pages 707-716.
    15. Domenico Cuoco & Hua He & Sergei Isaenko, 2008. "Optimal Dynamic Trading Strategies with Risk Limits," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 56(2), pages 358-368, April.
    16. Gao, Jianjun & Xiong, Yan & Li, Duan, 2016. "Dynamic mean-risk portfolio selection with multiple risk measures in continuous-time," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 249(2), pages 647-656.
    17. Tokat, Yesim & Rachev, Svetlozar T. & Schwartz, Eduardo S., 2003. "The stable non-Gaussian asset allocation: a comparison with the classical Gaussian approach," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 937-969, April.
    18. Jiang, Yifu & Olmo, Jose & Atwi, Majed, 2024. "Dynamic robust portfolio selection under market distress," The North American Journal of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 69(PB).
    19. Frank Fabozzi & Dashan Huang & Guofu Zhou, 2010. "Robust portfolios: contributions from operations research and finance," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 176(1), pages 191-220, April.
    20. Erick Rengifo & Emanuela Trifan, 2008. "How Investors Face Financial Risk Loss Aversion and Wealth Allocation," Fordham Economics Discussion Paper Series dp2008-01, Fordham University, Department of Economics.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Value at risk; Structured products; Risk measure; G28; G11; C61;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • G28 - Financial Economics - - Financial Institutions and Services - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • C61 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Mathematical Methods; Programming Models; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling - - - Optimization Techniques; Programming Models; Dynamic Analysis

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:kap:annfin:v:9:y:2013:i:2:p:167-183. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.