IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ3/7957611.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to choose the dependence types in operational risk measurement? A method considering strength, sensitivity and simplicity

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoqian Zhu
  • Yinghui Wang
  • Mingxi Liu
  • Jianping Li

Abstract

There are many types of dependencies within operational risk, such as loss frequency dependence, loss severity dependence and aggregate loss dependence. However, most studies simply choose one dependence type for their models, without solid justifications. This paper therefore proposes a method to choose the most appropriate dependence type for banks. First, we model different types of dependencies under the loss distribution approach to verify whether they indeed have distinct effects on operational risk measurement results. Then, we put forward three innovative criteria – strength, sensitivity and simplicity – to comprehensively evaluate the dependence types. The empirical analysis is based on the Chinese Operational Loss Database, the largest operational risk data set developed for China. The results show that the different dependence types do indeed have distinct effects on the estimated operational risk values for the Chinese banking industry. Further, loss frequency dependence and aggregate loss dependence are good choices for banks in practice, because they are very easy to model as well as very important.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoqian Zhu & Yinghui Wang & Mingxi Liu & Jianping Li, . "How to choose the dependence types in operational risk measurement? A method considering strength, sensitivity and simplicity," Journal of Operational Risk, Journal of Operational Risk.
  • Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ3:7957611
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2023-09/jop_li_web_final.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:journ3:7957611. 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.