IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/rsk/journ5/7878286.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review consistent yield curve stress testing: from Nelson–Siegel to machine learning

Author

Listed:
  • Vilen Abramov
  • Christopher Atchison
  • Zhengye Bian

Abstract

Following the global financial crisis of 2007–9, the regulators established a stress testing framework known as Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (CCAR). The regulatory stress scenarios in this framework are macroeconomic and do not define stress values for all the relevant risk factors. In particular, only three Treasury rates are captured in these scenarios. CCAR scenarios can be complemented by defining stress values for the missing risk factors. The Treasury rates corresponding to different nodes are highly correlated. Hence, the changes in the three Treasury rates defined in the regulatory scenarios may impact the other rates. This paper focuses on CCAR-consistent Treasury yield curve stress testing. We assessed via backtesting three modeling approaches that allow us to “build†the stressed curves under CCAR scenarios: the Nelson–Siegel approach, principal component analysis (PCA) and the artificial neural network approach. The PCA approach fits the scenario-generation problem better than Nelson–Siegel because it explicitly takes into consideration correlation among historical changes in rates corresponding to;different nodes, while the artificial neural network approach allows us to directly link the changes in the three Treasury rates to the changes in the other rates.

Suggested Citation

Handle: RePEc:rsk:journ5:7878286
as

Download full text from publisher

File URL: https://www.risk.net/system/files/digital_asset/2021-11/CCAR-consistent_yield_curve_stress_testing_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:journ5:7878286. 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-model-validation .

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.