IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/arx/papers/1907.01306.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Elicitability and Identifiability of Systemic Risk Measures

Author

Listed:
  • Tobias Fissler
  • Jana Hlavinov'a
  • Birgit Rudloff

Abstract

Identification and scoring functions are statistical tools to assess the calibration and the relative performance of risk measure estimates, e.g., in backtesting. A risk measures is called identifiable (elicitable) it it admits a strict identification function (strictly consistent scoring function). We consider measures of systemic risk introduced in Feinstein, Rudloff and Weber (2017). Since these are set-valued, we work within the theoretical framework of Fissler, Hlavinov\'a and Rudloff (2019) for forecast evaluation of set-valued functionals. We construct oriented selective identification functions, which induce a mixture representation of (strictly) consistent scoring functions. Their applicability is demonstrated with a comprehensive simulation study.

Suggested Citation

  • Tobias Fissler & Jana Hlavinov'a & Birgit Rudloff, 2019. "Elicitability and Identifiability of Systemic Risk Measures," Papers 1907.01306, arXiv.org, revised Oct 2019.
    • Handle: RePEc:arx:papers:1907.01306
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://arxiv.org/pdf/1907.01306
    File Function: Latest version
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Natalia Nolde & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Elicitability and backtesting: Perspectives for banking regulation," Papers 1608.05498, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2017.
    2. Hamel, Andreas H. & Kostner, Daniel, 2018. "Cone distribution functions and quantiles for multivariate random variables," Journal of Multivariate Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 97-113.
    3. Francesca Biagini & Jean-Pierre Fouque & Marco Frittelli & Thilo Meyer-Brandis, 2015. "A Unified Approach to Systemic Risk Measures via Acceptance Sets," Papers 1503.06354, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2015.
    4. Werner Ehm & Tilmann Gneiting & Alexander Jordan & Fabian Krüger, 2016. "Of quantiles and expectiles: consistent scoring functions, Choquet representations and forecast rankings," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 78(3), pages 505-562, June.
    5. Tilmann Gneiting & Fadoua Balabdaoui & Adrian E. Raftery, 2007. "Probabilistic forecasts, calibration and sharpness," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 69(2), pages 243-268, April.
    6. Patton, Andrew J., 2011. "Data-based ranking of realised volatility estimators," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 161(2), pages 284-303, April.
    7. Gneiting, Tilmann & Raftery, Adrian E., 2007. "Strictly Proper Scoring Rules, Prediction, and Estimation," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 102, pages 359-378, March.
    8. Elyès Jouini & Walter Schachermayer & Nizar Touzi, 2006. "Law Invariant Risk Measures Have the Fatou Property," Post-Print halshs-00176522, HAL.
    9. repec:dau:papers:123456789/342 is not listed on IDEAS
    10. Hans Föllmer & Stefan Weber, 2015. "The Axiomatic Approach to Risk Measures for Capital Determination," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 301-337, December.
    11. Tsyplakov, Alexander, 2014. "Theoretical guidelines for a partially informed forecast examiner," MPRA Paper 55017, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. repec:cup:judgdm:v:10:y:2015:i:5:p:456-468 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. C. Heinrich, 2014. "The mode functional is not elicitable," Biometrika, Biometrika Trust, vol. 101(1), pages 245-251.
    14. Hoffmann, Hannes & Meyer-Brandis, Thilo & Svindland, Gregor, 2016. "Risk-consistent conditional systemic risk measures," Stochastic Processes and their Applications, Elsevier, vol. 126(7), pages 2014-2037.
    15. Francesca Biagini & Jean‐Pierre Fouque & Marco Frittelli & Thilo Meyer‐Brandis, 2019. "A unified approach to systemic risk measures via acceptance sets," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 329-367, January.
    16. Newey, Whitney K & Powell, James L, 1987. "Asymmetric Least Squares Estimation and Testing," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(4), pages 819-847, July.
    17. Hannes Hoffmann & Thilo Meyer-Brandis & Gregor Svindland, 2016. "Risk-Consistent Conditional Systemic Risk Measures," Papers 1609.07897, arXiv.org.
    18. Hajo Holzmann & Matthias Eulert, 2014. "The role of the information set for forecasting - with applications to risk management," Papers 1404.7653, arXiv.org.
    19. David Bolin & Finn Lindgren, 2015. "Excursion and contour uncertainty regions for latent Gaussian models," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 77(1), pages 85-106, January.
    20. Valeria Bignozzi & Matteo Burzoni & Cosimo Munari, 2018. "Risk Measures Based on Benchmark Loss Distributions," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 18-48, Swiss Finance Institute, revised Nov 2018.
    21. Hans Föllmer & Alexander Schied, 2002. "Convex measures of risk and trading constraints," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 429-447.
    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. Ruodu Wang & Yunran Wei, 2020. "Risk functionals with convex level sets," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 30(4), pages 1337-1367, October.
    2. Tobias Fissler & Jana Hlavinová & Birgit Rudloff, 2021. "Elicitability and identifiability of set-valued measures of systemic risk," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 133-165, January.

    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. Tobias Fissler & Jana Hlavinová & Birgit Rudloff, 2021. "Elicitability and identifiability of set-valued measures of systemic risk," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 25(1), pages 133-165, January.
    2. Fissler Tobias & Ziegel Johanna F., 2021. "On the elicitability of range value at risk," Statistics & Risk Modeling, De Gruyter, vol. 38(1-2), pages 25-46, January.
    3. Marc-Oliver Pohle, 2020. "The Murphy Decomposition and the Calibration-Resolution Principle: A New Perspective on Forecast Evaluation," Papers 2005.01835, arXiv.org.
    4. Tobias Fissler & Yannick Hoga, 2021. "Backtesting Systemic Risk Forecasts using Multi-Objective Elicitability," Papers 2104.10673, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2022.
    5. Fissler, Tobias & Pesenti, Silvana M., 2023. "Sensitivity measures based on scoring functions," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 307(3), pages 1408-1423.
    6. Tobias Fissler & Silvana M. Pesenti, 2022. "Sensitivity Measures Based on Scoring Functions," Papers 2203.00460, arXiv.org, revised Jul 2022.
    7. Tobias Fissler & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2019. "Evaluating Range Value at Risk Forecasts," Papers 1902.04489, arXiv.org, revised Nov 2020.
    8. Werner Ehm & Tilmann Gneiting & Alexander Jordan & Fabian Krüger, 2016. "Of quantiles and expectiles: consistent scoring functions, Choquet representations and forecast rankings," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 78(3), pages 505-562, June.
    9. Tobias Fissler & Hajo Holzmann, 2022. "Measurability of functionals and of ideal point forecasts," Papers 2203.08635, arXiv.org.
    10. Natalia Nolde & Johanna F. Ziegel, 2016. "Elicitability and backtesting: Perspectives for banking regulation," Papers 1608.05498, arXiv.org, revised Feb 2017.
    11. Mucahit Aygun & Fabio Bellini & Roger J. A. Laeven, 2023. "Elicitability of Return Risk Measures," Papers 2302.13070, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2023.
    12. Dimitriadis, Timo & Schnaitmann, Julie, 2021. "Forecast encompassing tests for the expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 37(2), pages 604-621.
    13. Wang, Wei & Xu, Huifu & Ma, Tiejun, 2023. "Optimal scenario-dependent multivariate shortfall risk measure and its application in risk capital allocation," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 306(1), pages 322-347.
    14. Martin, Gael M. & Loaiza-Maya, Rubén & Maneesoonthorn, Worapree & Frazier, David T. & Ramírez-Hassan, Andrés, 2022. "Optimal probabilistic forecasts: When do they work?," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 384-406.
    15. Patrick Schmidt & Matthias Katzfuss & Tilmann Gneiting, 2021. "Interpretation of point forecasts with unknown directive," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(6), pages 728-743, September.
    16. Alexander Henzi & Johanna F. Ziegel & Tilmann Gneiting, 2021. "Isotonic distributional regression," Journal of the Royal Statistical Society Series B, Royal Statistical Society, vol. 83(5), pages 963-993, November.
    17. Allen, Sam & Koh, Jonathan & Segers, Johan & Ziegel, Johanna, 2024. "Tail calibration of probabilistic forecasts," LIDAM Discussion Papers ISBA 2024018, Université catholique de Louvain, Institute of Statistics, Biostatistics and Actuarial Sciences (ISBA).
    18. Taylor, James W., 2020. "Forecast combinations for value at risk and expected shortfall," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 428-441.
    19. Alessandro Doldi & Marco Frittelli, 2020. "Conditional Systemic Risk Measures," Papers 2010.11515, arXiv.org, revised May 2021.
    20. E. Kromer & L. Overbeck & K. Zilch, 2019. "Dynamic systemic risk measures for bounded discrete time processes," Mathematical Methods of Operations Research, Springer;Gesellschaft für Operations Research (GOR);Nederlands Genootschap voor Besliskunde (NGB), vol. 90(1), pages 77-108, August.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:arx:papers:1907.01306. 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: arXiv administrators (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://arxiv.org/ .

    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.