IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jforec/v43y2024i6p2021-2041.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

New runs‐based approach to testing value at risk forecasts

Author

Listed:
  • Marta Małecka

Abstract

The reformed Basel framework has left value at risk (VaR) as a basic tool of validating risk models. Within this framework, VaR independence tests have been regarded as critical to ensuring stability during periods of financial turmoil. However, until now, there is no consent among researchers regarding the choice of the appropriate test. The available procedures are either inaccurate in finite samples or need to rely on Monte Carlo simulations. To remedy these problems, we propose a new method for testing VaR models, based on the distribution of the number of runs. It outperforms the existing methods in two main aspects: First, it is exact in finite samples and thus allows for perfect control over the Type 1 error; second, its distribution is available in a closed form, so it does not require simulations before implementation. We show that it is the most adequate current procedure for testing low‐level VaR series, which corresponds to today's regulatory standards.

Suggested Citation

  • Marta Małecka, 2024. "New runs‐based approach to testing value at risk forecasts," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 43(6), pages 2021-2041, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:jforec:v:43:y:2024:i:6:p:2021-2041
    DOI: 10.1002/for.3115
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/for.3115
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/for.3115?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. Berkowitz, Jeremy, 2001. "Testing Density Forecasts, with Applications to Risk Management," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 19(4), pages 465-474, October.
    2. Dufour, Jean-Marie, 2006. "Monte Carlo tests with nuisance parameters: A general approach to finite-sample inference and nonstandard asymptotics," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 133(2), pages 443-477, August.
    3. Krämer, Walter & Wied, Dominik, 2015. "A simple and focused backtest of value at risk," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 137(C), pages 29-31.
    4. Kratz, Marie & Lok, Yen H. & McNeil, Alexander J., 2018. "Multinomial VaR backtests: A simple implicit approach to backtesting expected shortfall," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 393-407.
    5. Glosten, Lawrence R & Jagannathan, Ravi & Runkle, David E, 1993. "On the Relation between the Expected Value and the Volatility of the Nominal Excess Return on Stocks," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(5), pages 1779-1801, December.
    6. Bollerslev, Tim, 1986. "Generalized autoregressive conditional heteroskedasticity," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 31(3), pages 307-327, April.
    7. Denis Pelletier & Wei Wei, 2016. "The Geometric-VaR Backtesting Method," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 14(4), pages 725-745.
    8. Leccadito, Arturo & Boffelli, Simona & Urga, Giovanni, 2014. "Evaluating the accuracy of value-at-risk forecasts: New multilevel tests," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 206-216.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Marta Małecka & Radosław Pietrzyk, 2024. "A spectral approach to evaluating VaR forecasts: stock market evidence from the subprime mortgage crisis, through COVID-19, to the Russo–Ukrainian war," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(5), pages 4533-4567, October.
    2. Marta Małecka, 2021. "Testing for a serial correlation in VaR failures through the exponential autoregressive conditional duration model," Statistics in Transition New Series, Polish Statistical Association, vol. 22(1), pages 145-162, March.
    3. Małecka Marta, 2021. "Testing for a serial correlation in VaR failures through the exponential autoregressive conditional duration model," Statistics in Transition New Series, Statistics Poland, vol. 22(1), pages 145-162, March.
    4. Gordy, Michael B. & McNeil, Alexander J., 2020. "Spectral backtests of forecast distributions with application to risk management," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    5. Laura Garcia-Jorcano & Alfonso Novales, 2020. "A dominance approach for comparing the performance of VaR forecasting models," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 1411-1448, September.
    6. Nieto, Maria Rosa & Ruiz, Esther, 2016. "Frontiers in VaR forecasting and backtesting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 475-501.
    7. Argyropoulos, Christos & Panopoulou, Ekaterini, 2019. "Backtesting VaR and ES under the magnifying glass," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 22-37.
    8. Jean-Paul Laurent & Hassan Omidi Firouzi, 2022. "Market Risk and Volatility Weighted Historical Simulation After Basel III," Working Papers hal-03679434, HAL.
    9. Sullivan Hu'e & Christophe Hurlin & Yang Lu, 2024. "Backtesting Expected Shortfall: Accounting for both duration and severity with bivariate orthogonal polynomials," Papers 2405.02012, arXiv.org, revised May 2024.
    10. Turan Bali & Panayiotis Theodossiou, 2007. "A conditional-SGT-VaR approach with alternative GARCH models," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 151(1), pages 241-267, April.
    11. Deschamps, Philippe J., 2012. "Bayesian estimation of generalized hyperbolic skewed student GARCH models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3035-3054.
    12. Laura Garcia‐Jorcano & Alfonso Novales, 2021. "Volatility specifications versus probability distributions in VaR forecasting," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(2), pages 189-212, March.
    13. Tae-Hwy Lee & Yong Bao & Burak Saltoğlu, 2007. "Comparing density forecast models Previous versions of this paper have been circulated with the title, 'A Test for Density Forecast Comparison with Applications to Risk Management' since October 2003;," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 203-225.
    14. Markus Haas, 2004. "Mixed Normal Conditional Heteroskedasticity," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 211-250.
    15. Chen, Qian & Gerlach, Richard H., 2013. "The two-sided Weibull distribution and forecasting financial tail risk," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 527-540.
    16. Pesaran, M. Hashem & Schleicher, Christoph & Zaffaroni, Paolo, 2009. "Model averaging in risk management with an application to futures markets," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 280-305, March.
    17. Sander Barendse & Erik Kole & Dick van Dijk, 2023. "Backtesting Value-at-Risk and Expected Shortfall in the Presence of Estimation Error," Journal of Financial Econometrics, Oxford University Press, vol. 21(2), pages 528-568.
    18. Sebastian Bayer & Timo Dimitriadis, 2018. "Regression Based Expected Shortfall Backtesting," Papers 1801.04112, arXiv.org, revised Sep 2019.
    19. Enrique Molina‐Muñoz & Andrés Mora‐Valencia & Javier Perote, 2021. "Backtesting expected shortfall for world stock index ETFs with extreme value theory and Gram–Charlier mixtures," International Journal of Finance & Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 4163-4189, July.
    20. Deschamps, Philippe J., 2012. "Bayesian estimation of generalized hyperbolic skewed student GARCH models," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 56(11), pages 3035-3054.

    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:wly:jforec:v:43:y:2024:i:6:p:2021-2041. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/2966 .

    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.