IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ4/2161074.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A stress test to incorporate correlation breakdown

Author

Listed:
  • Jongwoo Kim and Christopher C. Finger

Abstract

ABSTRACT The authors introduce the broken arrow stress test, in which they estimate correlation levels in stress situations and apply these correlation levels to arrive at the expected loss for the peripheral assets in the stress test. To identify correlation in stress situations, the joint distribution of core and peripheral assets is specified as a mixture of normals. For the majority of cases, the asset returns are drawn from a normal distribution with lower volatility and one level of correlation; on rarer hectic days, the asset returns are drawn from a different normal distribution, with higher levels of volatility and a second correlation level. In the example presented, stressed correlation levels illustrate significant changes in correlation for four of the 18 markets examined. The broken arrow stress test produces a more reasonable expected loss estimate than other parametric methods and does not present the problem with the idiosyncrasies seen with historical stress tests. Furthermore, joint distributions estimated over periods without panics will misestimate the degree of correlation between asset returns during panics. Under these circumstances, fear and disengagement by investors often result in simultaneous declines in the values of private obligations, as investors no longer realistically differentiate among degrees of risk and liquidity, and increases in the values of riskless government securities. Consequently, the benefits of portfolio diversification will tend to be overestimated when the rare panic periods are not taken into account. Remarks by FRB Chairman, Alan Greenspan [4]

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ4:2161074
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/import/protected/digital_assets/4867/v2n3a1.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:journ4:2161074. 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-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.