IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/fininn/v4y2018i1d10.1186_s40854-018-0095-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Value-at-risk under ambiguity aversion

Author

Listed:
  • Rossella Agliardi

    (University of Bologna)

Abstract

This study explored the effects of ambiguity on the calculation of Value-at-Risk (VaR) using a mathematical model based on the theory of Choquet-Brownian processes. It was found that while a moderate degree of ambiguity aversion yields a higher value for VaR and Expected Shortfall (ES), the result can be reversed in a deeply ambiguous environment. Additionally, some sufficient conditions are provided for the preservation of this effect under various forms of risk aggregation. This study offers a new perspective to full awareness on capital requirement calculation as requested by international regulation.

Suggested Citation

  • Rossella Agliardi, 2018. "Value-at-risk under ambiguity aversion," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 4(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:fininn:v:4:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1186_s40854-018-0095-z
    DOI: 10.1186/s40854-018-0095-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1186/s40854-018-0095-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1186/s40854-018-0095-z?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Boyarchenko, Nina, 2012. "Ambiguity shifts and the 2007–2008 financial crisis," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 59(5), pages 493-507.
    2. Rossella Agliardi, 2017. "Asymmetric Choquet random walks and ambiguity aversion or seeking," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 83(4), pages 591-602, December.
    3. Thorsten Hens & Marc Oliver Rieger, 2014. "Can utility optimization explain the demand for structured investment products?," Quantitative Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 673-681, April.
    4. Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2010. "Ambiguity and Asset Markets," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 315-346, December.
    5. Guidolin, Massimo & Liu, Hening, 2016. "Ambiguity Aversion and Underdiversification," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 51(4), pages 1297-1323, August.
    6. Schmeidler, David, 1989. "Subjective Probability and Expected Utility without Additivity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 57(3), pages 571-587, May.
    7. Marc Oliver Rieger & Mei Wang & Thorsten Hens, 2015. "Risk Preferences Around the World," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 61(3), pages 637-648, March.
    8. Agliardi, Elettra & Agliardi, Rossella & Spanjers, Willem, 2016. "Corporate financing decisions under ambiguity: Pecking order and liquidity policy implications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 6012-6020.
    9. André Lapied & Robert Kast, 2010. "Dynamically consistent Choquet random walk and real investments," Working Papers 10-21, LAMETA, Universtiy of Montpellier, revised 2010.
    10. 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. Lorenzo Reus & Guillermo Alexander Sepúlveda-Hurtado, 2023. "Foreign exchange trading and management with the stochastic dual dynamic programming method," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-38, December.
    2. Wujun Lv & Tao Pang & Xiaobao Xia & Jingzhou Yan, 2023. "Dynamic portfolio choice with uncertain rare-events risk in stock and cryptocurrency markets," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 9(1), pages 1-28, December.

    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. Jeleva, Meglena & Tallon, Jean-Marc, 2016. "Ambiguïté, comportements et marchés financiers," L'Actualité Economique, Société Canadienne de Science Economique, vol. 92(1-2), pages 351-383, Mars-Juin.
    2. Agliardi, Elettra & Agliardi, Rossella & Spanjers, Willem, 2016. "Corporate financing decisions under ambiguity: Pecking order and liquidity policy implications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 6012-6020.
    3. Loïc Berger & Louis Eeckhoudt, 2021. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Value of Diversification," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(3), pages 1639-1647, March.
    4. Moti Michaeli, 2014. "Riskiness for sets of gambles," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 56(3), pages 515-547, August.
    5. Loïc Berger & Louis Eeckhoudt, 2020. "Risk, Ambiguity, And The Value Of Diversification," Working Papers hal-02910906, HAL.
    6. E. Agliardi & R. Agliardi & W. Spanjers, 2014. "Cash holdings and financing decisions under ambiguity," Working Papers wp979, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    7. Driouchi, Tarik & So, Raymond H.Y. & Trigeorgis, Lenos, 2020. "Investor ambiguity, systemic banking risk and economic activity: The case of too-big-to-fail," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 62(C).
    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. Ehud Lehrer, 2009. "A new integral for capacities," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 39(1), pages 157-176, April.
    10. Doron Nisani & Mahmoud Qadan & Amit Shelef, 2022. "Risk and Uncertainty at the Outbreak of the COVID-19 Pandemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-12, July.
    11. Xia Han & Bin Wang & Ruodu Wang & Qinyu Wu, 2021. "Risk Concentration and the Mean-Expected Shortfall Criterion," Papers 2108.05066, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2022.
    12. Leitner, Johannes, 2005. "Dilatation monotonous Choquet integrals," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(8), pages 994-1006, December.
    13. Assa, Hirbod & Zimper, Alexander, 2018. "Preferences over all random variables: Incompatibility of convexity and continuity," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 71-83.
    14. Corina Birghila & Tim J. Boonen & Mario Ghossoub, 2023. "Optimal insurance under maxmin expected utility," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 27(2), pages 467-501, April.
    15. Enrico G. De Giorgi & David B. Brown & Melvyn Sim, 2010. "Dual representation of choice and aspirational preferences," University of St. Gallen Department of Economics working paper series 2010 2010-07, Department of Economics, University of St. Gallen.
    16. Albrecht, Peter & Huggenberger, Markus, 2017. "The fundamental theorem of mutual insurance," Insurance: Mathematics and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 180-188.
    17. Dan A. Iancu & Marek Petrik & Dharmashankar Subramanian, 2015. "Tight Approximations of Dynamic Risk Measures," Mathematics of Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 40(3), pages 655-682, March.
    18. Mustapha Ridaoui & Michel Grabisch, 2016. "Choquet integral calculus on a continuous support and its applications," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 26(1), pages 73-93.
    19. Yi Shen & Zachary Van Oosten & Ruodu Wang, 2024. "Partial Law Invariance and Risk Measures," Papers 2401.17265, arXiv.org, revised Jun 2024.
    20. repec:hal:pseose:hal-01373325 is not listed on IDEAS
    21. Krahnen, Jan Pieter & Ockenfels, Peter & Wilde, Christian, 2014. "Measuring ambiguity aversion: A systematic experimental approach," SAFE Working Paper Series 55, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.

    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:spr:fininn:v:4:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1186_s40854-018-0095-z. 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.