IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ3/2401156.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Combining scenario and historical data in the loss distribution approach: a new procedure that incorporates measures of agreement between scenarios and historical data

Author

Listed:
  • P. J. de Jongh, T. de Wet, H. Raubenheimer and J. H. Venter

Abstract

ABSTRACT Many banks use the loss distribution approach in their advanced measurement models to estimate regulatory or economic capital. This boils down to estimating the 99.9% value-at-risk of the aggregate loss distribution and is notoriously difficult to do accurately. Also, it is well-known that the accuracy with which the tail of the loss severity distribution is estimated is the most important driver in determining a reasonable estimate of regulatory capital. To this end, banks use internal data and external data (jointly referred to as historical data) as well as scenario assessments in their endeavor to improve the accuracy with which they estimate the severity distribution. In this paper, we propose a simple new method whereby the severity distribution may be estimated using both historical data and experts' scenario assessments. The way in which historical data and scenario assessments are integrated incorporates measures of agreement between these data sources, which can be used to evaluate the quality of both. In particular, we show that the procedure has definite advantages over traditional methods in which the severity distribution is modeled and fitted separately for the body and tail parts, with the body part based only on historical data and the tail part based on scenario assessments.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:2401156
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/import/protected/digital_assets/8710/jop_venter_web.pdf
Download Restriction: no
---><---

More about this item

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:rsk:journ3:2401156. 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.

We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Thomas Paine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.risk.net/journal-of-operational-risk .

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.